Arizona Appellate Decisions

The law that an Arizona court will apply to a case is created both by statute, enacted by the legislature, and precedent from appellate decisions. Our attorneys use our blog to regularly summarize some of the most influential Arizona Appellate decisions and break it down so that it is easier to understand.

Amadore v. Lifgren (2018)

In Amadore v. Lifgren, the Arizona Court of Appeals vacated (1) the effective dates the family court imposed for modification of child support and spousal maintenance and (2) the family court's decision to reduce prospective child support to offset overpayment of previous support. The parties were divorced by default decree in 2013. It awarded Mother $2,000 per month of indefinite

Amadore v. Lifgren (2018)2018-11-08T10:52:46+00:00

Barron v. Barron (2018)

In Barron v. Barron, the Arizona Court of Appeals reversed the family court’s parenting time determination because it was based on impermissible presumptions about equal parenting time and gender.

Barron v. Barron (2018)2018-11-09T12:17:54+00:00

Paul E. v. Courtney F. (2018)

In Paul E. v. Courtney F., the Arizona Court of Appeals vacated the family court’s orders that required parents to use a specific treatment provider to provide therapy for their child and to abstain from discussing “sensitive topics” with the child. When the parties divorced in 2010, the decree awarded joint legal decision-making with Father to retain final say

Paul E. v. Courtney F. (2018)2018-11-06T16:25:34+00:00

Birnstihl v. Birnstihl (2018)

In Birnstihl v. Birnstihl, the Arizona Court of Appeals reversed the family court’s dismissal of a petition to modify child support and held that claim preclusion does not bar modification when the basis to modify is correction of information a previous order used to calculate support.

Birnstihl v. Birnstihl (2018)2018-11-06T16:55:58+00:00

Engstrom v. McCarthy (2018)

In Engstrom v. McCarthy, the Court of Appeals held that the family court’s adoption of a Rule 69 agreement ceases its discretion to reject the agreement at a later date.

Engstrom v. McCarthy (2018)2018-11-06T16:58:49+00:00