Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Moreno v. Silva

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided January 24, 2013No. 1 CA-CV 11-0385Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partGould, Judge

¶ 6 I concur with the majority’s decision in affirming the family court’s ruling denying Grandmother’s petition for visitation. I respectfully dissent, however, from the majority’s decision to award Mother her attorneys’ fees because Mother cites no basis for her request.

¶ 7 A party’s request for attorneys’ fees on appeal must be made pursuant to Rule 21(e)(1), Arizona Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure. Rule 21(c)(1), as amended January 1, 2012, provides:

A claim for allowance of attorneys’ fees shall be made in the briefs on appeal or by written motion filed and served before oral argument…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Ezell v. QuonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2010
  2. Assyia v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
  3. William Roubos v. Hon. Leslie miller/tucsonArizona Supreme Court · 2007
  4. Flood Control District v. Paloma Investment Ltd. PartnershipCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
  5. Best v. MirandaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API