A. To promote amicable settlement of disputes between parties to a marriage attendant on their separation or annulment or the dissolution of their marriage, the parties may enter into a written separation agreement containing provisions for disposition of any property owned by either of them, maintenance of either of them, and support, legal decision-making and parenting time of their children. A separation agreement may provide that its maintenance terms shall not be modified.
B. In a proceeding for dissolution of marriage, for annulment or for legal separation, the terms of the separation agreement, except those providing for the support, legal decision-making and parenting time of children, are binding on the court unless it finds, after considering the economic circumstances of the parties and any other relevant evidence produced by the parties, on their own motion or on request of the court, that the separation agreement is unfair.
C. If the court finds the separation agreement unfair as to disposition of property or maintenance, it may request the parties to submit a revised separation agreement or may make orders for the disposition of property or maintenance.
D. If the court finds that the separation agreement is not unfair as to disposition of property or maintenance and that it is reasonable as to support, legal decision-making and parenting time of children, the separation agreement shall be set forth or incorporated by reference in the decree of dissolution, annulment or legal separation and the parties shall be ordered to perform them. If the separation agreement provides that its terms shall not be set forth in the decree, the decree shall identify the separation agreement as incorporated by reference and state that the court has found the terms as to property disposition and maintenance not unfair and the terms as to support, legal decision-making and parenting time of children reasonable.
E. Terms of the agreement set forth or incorporated by reference in the decree are enforceable by all remedies available for enforcement of a judgment, including contempt.
F. Except for terms concerning the maintenance of either party and the support, legal decision-making or parenting time of children, entry of the decree shall thereafter preclude the modification of the terms of the decree and the property settlement agreement, if any, set forth or incorporated by reference.
G. Notwithstanding subsection F of this section, entry of a decree that sets forth or incorporates by reference a separation agreement that provides that its maintenance terms shall not be modified prevents the court from exercising jurisdiction to modify the decree and the separation agreement regarding maintenance, including a decree entered before July 20, 1996.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
114
cases (
25 in the last 5 years), 1959–2026 · leading case:
Buckholtz v. Buckholtz, 435 P.3d 1032 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
Buckholtz v. Buckholtz, 435 P.3d 1032 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 39× “" We also hold that parties to a separation agreement may consider their sole and separate property when creating an agreement, and if they do so, the superior court also may consider the parties' sole and separate property in determining whether the agreement is unfair under…”
State Ex Rel. Dep't of Econ. Sec. v. Waldren, 171 P.3d 1214 (Ariz. 2007).
· cites it 43× “Like Diefenbach, Fye addressed the application of Rule 60(c)(5) in the context of death, a situation not controlled by A.R.S. §§ 25-317 or 25-319, but rather by a separate statutory provision in A.”
Marriage of Breitbart-Napp v. Napp, 163 P.3d 1024 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 25× “In that case it becomes unenforceable by the parties, whether or not it was previously binding upon them. The court then has two options: “it may request the parties to submit a revised separation agreement or may make orders for the disposition of property or maintenance.”
Eans-Snoderly v. Snoderly, 473 P.3d 337 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020).
· cites it 12× “To promote amicable settlement of disputes between parties to a marriage, the parties may enter into a written separation agreement containing provisions for disposition of any property owned by either of them, maintenance of either of them, and support, custody and parenting…”
Marriage of LaPrade v. LaPrade, 941 P.2d 1268 (Ariz. 1997).
· cites it 22× “Brown contends that after the 1973 legislation, courts must disregard the prior common law rule and apply only the elements of A.R.S. § 25-317. As such, Brown claims that the Agreement merges with the Decree unless the Agreement expressly provides that its terms shall not be set…”
Murray v. Murray, 367 P.3d 78 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 6× “In any event, the court found, “The written agreement pertains to parenting time, legal decision-making, and child support and the Court in exercising its independent discretion pursuant to AR.S. § 25-317, rejects the agreement.” ¶ 12 Arizona Rule of Family Law Procedure 69…”
Meek v. Meek, 539 P.3d 920 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 40× “Noting that A.R.S. § 25-317, which governs separation agreements, does not provide an express exception to A.”
McNeil v. Hoskyns, 337 P.3d 46 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 10× “See A.R.S. § 25-317(B), (C) (court may decline to adopt a spousal maintenance agreement it concludes is unfair).”
In Re the Marriage of Thorlin, 746 P.2d 929 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 20× “Husband maintains that § 25-327(A) applies to all decrees of dissolution, but notes that it is specifically made inapplicable where § 25-317(F) applies; that § 25-317(A) evidences a legislative policy to encourage settlement agreements in marital disputes; and that § 25-317…”
Matter of Gubser, 614 P.2d 845 (Ariz. 1980).
· cites it 6× “1 Appellant Shirley Gubser points out that the parties’ separation agreement was ap- proved by the original dissolution court and incorporated into their decree of dissolution pursuant to A.”
Quijada v. Quijada, 437 P.3d 876 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 2× “” A.R.S. § 25-317(F). Although a spouse may challenge the method and mechanism by which retirement benefits are 3 QUIJADA v.”
Sharp v. Sharp, 877 P.2d 304 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 5× “”) § 25-317(A); Wick v. Wick, 107 Ariz. 382, 384 , 489 P.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-317(A) — 24 cases
Buckholtz v. Buckholtz, 435 P.3d 1032 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
“" We also hold that parties to a separation agreement may consider their sole and separate property when creating an agreement, and if they do so, the superior court also may consider the parties' sole and separate property in determining whether the agreement is unfair under…”
State Ex Rel. Dep't of Econ. Sec. v. Waldren, 171 P.3d 1214 (Ariz. 2007).
“Like Diefenbach, Fye addressed the application of Rule 60(c)(5) in the context of death, a situation not controlled by A.R.S. §§ 25-317 or 25-319, but rather by a separate statutory provision in A.”
Marriage of Breitbart-Napp v. Napp, 163 P.3d 1024 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007).
“In that case it becomes unenforceable by the parties, whether or not it was previously binding upon them. The court then has two options: “it may request the parties to submit a revised separation agreement or may make orders for the disposition of property or maintenance.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-317(B) — 32 cases
Buckholtz v. Buckholtz, 435 P.3d 1032 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
“" We also hold that parties to a separation agreement may consider their sole and separate property when creating an agreement, and if they do so, the superior court also may consider the parties' sole and separate property in determining whether the agreement is unfair under…”
Marriage of Breitbart-Napp v. Napp, 163 P.3d 1024 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007).
“In that case it becomes unenforceable by the parties, whether or not it was previously binding upon them. The court then has two options: “it may request the parties to submit a revised separation agreement or may make orders for the disposition of property or maintenance.”
Meek v. Meek, 539 P.3d 920 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
“Noting that A.R.S. § 25-317, which governs separation agreements, does not provide an express exception to A.”
Murray v. Murray, 367 P.3d 78 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
“In any event, the court found, “The written agreement pertains to parenting time, legal decision-making, and child support and the Court in exercising its independent discretion pursuant to AR.S. § 25-317, rejects the agreement.” ¶ 12 Arizona Rule of Family Law Procedure 69…”
Sharp v. Sharp, 877 P.2d 304 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994).
“”) § 25-317(A); Wick v. Wick, 107 Ariz. 382, 384 , 489 P.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-317(C) — 2 cases
Marriage of Breitbart-Napp v. Napp, 163 P.3d 1024 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007).
“In that case it becomes unenforceable by the parties, whether or not it was previously binding upon them. The court then has two options: “it may request the parties to submit a revised separation agreement or may make orders for the disposition of property or maintenance.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-317(D) — 21 cases
Marriage of LaPrade v. LaPrade, 941 P.2d 1268 (Ariz. 1997).
“Brown contends that after the 1973 legislation, courts must disregard the prior common law rule and apply only the elements of A.R.S. § 25-317. As such, Brown claims that the Agreement merges with the Decree unless the Agreement expressly provides that its terms shall not be set…”
State Ex Rel. Dep't of Econ. Sec. v. Waldren, 171 P.3d 1214 (Ariz. 2007).
“Like Diefenbach, Fye addressed the application of Rule 60(c)(5) in the context of death, a situation not controlled by A.R.S. §§ 25-317 or 25-319, but rather by a separate statutory provision in A.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-317(E) — 12 cases
Eans-Snoderly v. Snoderly, 473 P.3d 337 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020).
“To promote amicable settlement of disputes between parties to a marriage, the parties may enter into a written separation agreement containing provisions for disposition of any property owned by either of them, maintenance of either of them, and support, custody and parenting…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-317(F) — 19 cases
In Re the Marriage of Thorlin, 746 P.2d 929 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987).
“Husband maintains that § 25-327(A) applies to all decrees of dissolution, but notes that it is specifically made inapplicable where § 25-317(F) applies; that § 25-317(A) evidences a legislative policy to encourage settlement agreements in marital disputes; and that § 25-317…”
Quijada v. Quijada, 437 P.3d 876 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
“” A.R.S. § 25-317(F). Although a spouse may challenge the method and mechanism by which retirement benefits are 3 QUIJADA v.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-317(G) — 9 cases
State Ex Rel. Dep't of Econ. Sec. v. Waldren, 171 P.3d 1214 (Ariz. 2007).
“Like Diefenbach, Fye addressed the application of Rule 60(c)(5) in the context of death, a situation not controlled by A.R.S. §§ 25-317 or 25-319, but rather by a separate statutory provision in A.”
McNeil v. Hoskyns, 337 P.3d 46 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
“See A.R.S. § 25-317(B), (C) (court may decline to adopt a spousal maintenance agreement it concludes is unfair).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.