Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

In re Cotter

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided June 21, 2018No. 2 CA-CV 2017-0159Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBrearcliffe, Judge

¶ 20 I concur in the opinion as to the issue of equalization credit and in its denial of appellee's request for attorney fees. I respectfully dissent from the opinion as to spousal maintenance and would affirm the lower court decree as a whole.

Sufficient Property

¶ 21 The majority primarily concludes that the trial court failed to make a finding under A.R.S. § 25-319(A)(1) that Cotter had sufficient property to provide for her reasonable needs "during ... her lifetime." The majority concludes that "[p]ursuant to 25-319(A), the court may grant an award 'if it finds that the spouse seeking…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Neal v. NealArizona Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Marriage of Deatherage v. DeatherageCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1984
  3. State v. HindenCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2010
  4. State v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
  5. Town of Wickenburg v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1977

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API