Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 25
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-321 (2026)

Representation of child by counsel; fees

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The court may appoint an attorney to represent the interests of a minor or dependent child with respect to the child's support, custody and parenting time. The court may enter an order for costs, fees and disbursements in favor of the child's attorney. The order may be made against either or both parents.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 65 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1957–2024 · leading case: J.A.R. v. Superior Court, 877 P.2d 1323 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
J.A.R. v. Superior Court, 877 P.2d 1323 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 26× “Did the trial court abuse its discretion under A.R.S. § 25-321 in denying the child’s request for independent counsel? 3.”
Castillo v. Indus. Comm'n, 520 P.2d 1142 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1974). · cites it 12× “Thus A.R.S. § 25-321, as it existed prior to its amendment in 1973, provided that in domestic relations cases the trial court could under certain circumstances "from time to time after entry of final judgment .”
O'Hair v. O'Hair, 508 P.2d 66 (Ariz. 1973). · cites it 12× “However, because the Legislature has provided, by A.R.S. § 25-321, that the Superior Court may from time to time after final judgment amend, change or alter any of the provisions respecting the care, custody or maintenance of children, we think it retains jurisdiction pending…”
Fye v. Zigoures, 562 P.2d 1077 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 6× “A.R.S. § 25-321 provided that the court could from time to time after entry of final judgment alter, revise or amend the decree relating to alimony.”
Cummings v. Lockwood, 327 P.2d 1012 (Ariz. 1958). · cites it 7× “The sole question presented is whether the amount of an allowance of alimony, in the final judgment, payable in installments of $75 per month “for a period of six (6) months only” is subject to subsequent modification under A.R.S. § 25-321. That section provides: “The court may…”
Barnett v. Barnett, 388 P.2d 433 (Ariz. 1964). · cites it 10× “(Emphasis supplied) Appellant urges that we overrule Cummings on the grounds that A.R.S. § 25-321 does not impliedly except alimony in gross from its operation.”
Simpson v. Superior Court, 351 P.2d 179 (Ariz. 1960). · cites it 6× “” Under A.R.S. § 25-321 “[t]he court may from time to time after entry of final judgment, on petition of either party, amend, revise and alter the portions of the decree which relate to payment of money for the support and maintenance of the wife * * * as may be just The above…”
Snow v. Snow, 745 P.2d 196 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 10× “Relief was granted and the supreme court held that the trial court lacked authority under former A.R.S. § 25-321 to modify the original alimony award.”
Kingsbery v. Kingsbery, 379 P.2d 893 (Ariz. 1963). · cites it 5× “Section 25-321, A.R.S. provides: “The court may from time to time after entry of final judgment, on petition of either party, amend, revise and alter the portions of the decree which relate to payment of money for the support and maintenance of the wife or the expenses of the…”
In Re Guardianship of Rodgers, 413 P.2d 744 (Ariz. 1966). · cites it 8× “A.R.S. § 25-321 and the father's *275 contention that there was no showing of a change of circumstances raises the issue of whether a showing of a change of circumstances is necessary before a court can alter a former custody decree.”
Burkhardt v. Burkhardt, 510 P.2d 735 (Ariz. 1973). · cites it 4× “2d 66 (1973), this Court held that a trial court retains jurisdiction in divorce actions on the issue of child care under A.R.S. § 25-321 “at least where the provisions for the care, custody and maintenance of the children are not the subject matter of the appeal.”
Kent v. Comm'r, 61 T.C. 133 (Tax Ct. 1973). · cites it 4× “Under Arizona law the payments are characterized as an award of alimony in gross and as such are not subject to modification by means of Ariz.”
Show all 65 citing cases →
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.