Cited by

Co., ¶ 6 (2008) (reaffirming the notice pleading standard for civil complaints); (reiterating our long-standing preference to decide cases on the merits).

Nevertheless, we decline to reject the brief on that basis, and choose to address the merits of Hill’s arguments.

Although we could summarily reject Father’s appeal on that basis, we decline to do so and instead address the merits of the arguments we can identify presented in Father’s appeal.

Although we could summarily reject Father’s appeal, we will address the merits of the arguments we can identify presented in Father’s appeal.

However, while these deficiencies may be sufficient cause for dismissal, we decline the Department's invitation because our general preference is to decide cases upon their merits, Drees v. Drees, 16 Ariz.App.

(appellate court may entertain the merits of an issue even if deficiently briefed); Delmastro & ¶ 7, n.2 (App. 2011).

(noting the court is "inclined to decide cases on their merits").

(“[T]his Court is reluctant to perform the duties of counsel for either party to an appeal; however, .

(“[W]e remain inclined to decide cases on their merits.”).

See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (recognizing the preference to decide cases on the merits rather than to dismiss summarily on procedural grounds) ().

See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (recognizing preference to decide cases on the merits rather than to dismiss summarily on procedural grounds) ().

Because we prefer to decide cases on the merits, in our discretion we address Mattison’s arguments as best as we can understand them.

We are not required to assume the duties of an advocate and search voluminous records and exhibits to substantiate an appellant’s claims.”) ( ).

See, (reiterating preference to “decide cases on their 4 Hiller has not challenged the court’s ruling that the adult children were indispensable parties.