Cited by

v. Stanford, ¶ 14 (App. 2014) (finding that a court erred in proceeding with guardianship proceedings in the absence of a motion complying with A.R.S.

v. Stanford, ¶ 14 (App. 2014).

v. Stanford, ¶ 13 (App. 2014) (the court has no jurisdiction to proceed with a guardianship when no motion was filed).

v. Stanford, -80, ¶¶ 9-13 (App. 2014) (The juvenile court may not sua sponte move for permanent guardianship.).

v. Stanford, ¶¶ 12–14 (App. 2014).

v. Stanford, ¶ 14 (App. 2014) (holding that juvenile court cannot initiate a guardianship “in the absence of a statutorily compliant motion by a party to the proceedings”).

v. Stanford, ¶ 14 (App. 2014) (holding that juvenile court cannot initiate a guardianship “in the absence of a statutorily compliant motion by a party to the proceedings”).

v. Stanford, ¶ 14 (App. 2014) (finding that juvenile court could not initiate guardianship “in the absence of a statutorily compliant motion by a party to the proceedings”).

v. Stanford, –81 ¶¶ 16–18 (App. 2014) (explaining a placement with a relative in another state is proper under the ICPC when done by court order).

v. Stanford , , ¶¶ 10-13, (juvenile court lacked authority to move sua sponte to establish permanent guardianship).

v. Stanford, -80, ¶¶ 8-13 (App. 2014) (concluding the juvenile court could not initiate a guardianship proceeding absent a motion filed pursuant to A.R.S.

v. Stanford, ¶¶ 13-14 (App. 2014).

v. Stanford, -80, ¶¶ 9-14 (App. 2014).

v. Stanford, -81, ¶¶ 17-18, -64 (App. 2014).