Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403 (2026)

Legal decision-making; best interests of child

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

25-403. Legal decision-making; best interests of child

A. The court shall determine legal decision-making and parenting time, either originally or on petition for modification, in accordance with the best interests of the child. The court shall consider all factors that are relevant to the child's physical and emotional well-being, including:

1. The past, present and potential future relationship between the parent and the child.

2. The interaction and interrelationship of the child with the child's parent or parents, the child's siblings and any other person who may significantly affect the child's best interest.

3. The child's adjustment to home, school and community.

4. If the child is of suitable age and maturity, the wishes of the child as to legal decision-making and parenting time.

5. The mental and physical health of all individuals involved.

6. Which parent is more likely to allow the child frequent, meaningful and continuing contact with the other parent. This paragraph does not apply if the court determines that a parent is acting in good faith to protect the child from witnessing an act of domestic violence or being a victim of domestic violence or child abuse.

7. Whether one parent intentionally misled the court to cause an unnecessary delay, to increase the cost of litigation or to persuade the court to give a legal decision-making or a parenting time preference to that parent.

8. Whether there has been domestic violence or child abuse pursuant to section 25-403.03.

9. The nature and extent of coercion or duress used by a parent in obtaining an agreement regarding legal decision-making or parenting time.

10. Whether a parent has complied with chapter 3, article 5 of this title.

11. Whether either parent was convicted of an act of false reporting of child abuse or neglect under section 13-2907.02.

B. In a contested legal decision-making or parenting time case, the court shall make specific findings on the record about all relevant factors and the reasons for which the decision is in the best interests of the child.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 337 cases (163 in the last 5 years), 1998–2026 · leading case: Reid v. Reid, 213 P.3d 353 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Reid v. Reid, 213 P.3d 353 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 68× “The family court stated that it was in the children's best interests that Mother retain sole legal custody and primary residential custody. However, as even Mother acknowledges, the court provided no explanation why this arrangement was in the children's best interests.”

Gutierrez v. Hon. fox/kivlighn, 394 P.3d 1096 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 29× “*264 ¶ 11 On February 15, 2017, the superior court filed temporary orders, which included a section titled “Best Interest Findings: A.R.S. § 25-403.” In its order, the court found Father’s paternity “sufficiently established,” awarded Father parenting time to take place in…”

Backstrand v. Backstrand, 479 P.3d 846 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 20× “2009) (in part, the rationale for A.R.S. § 25-403’s requirement for specific findings on the record is to provide a baseline for “any future petitions by either party based on ‘changed circumstances’”).”

Owen v. Blackhawk, 79 P.3d 667 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 24× “§ 25-408(J)(3), (5), (6), and (8) and referenced A.R.S. § 25-403 (Supp.2002), which is a factor listed in A.”

Downs v. Scheffler, 80 P.3d 775 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 32× “¶ 9 We have previously held that a custody decision without the specific findings required by § 25-403 is deficient and, as a matter of law, constitutes an abuse of the family court’s discretion.”

Hart v. Hart, 204 P.3d 441 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 22× “Section 25-403(B) provides: “In a contested custody case, the court shall make specific findings on the record about all relevant factors and the reasons for which the decision is in the best interests of the child.”

Nold v. Nold, 304 P.3d 1093 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 13× “” The family court also stated that it considered the factors listed in A.R.S. § 25-403 (Supp.2012), 2 but it did not make any findings as to those factors.”

Murray v. Murray, 367 P.3d 78 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 11× “A.R.S. § 25-403 (2016). ¶ 7 In turn, A.R.”

In Re the Marriage of Diezsi, 38 P.3d 1189 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 14× “Following the review hearing in September, the trial court found Christina in contempt for various conduct; issued a detailed order about, among other matters, Christina’s drug activity; and admonished both parents to provide a “reasonably safe and healthy environment for the…”

Deluna v. Petitto, 450 P.3d 1273 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 9× “See A.R.S. §§ 25-403, -408(G), (I); Owen v. Blackhawk, 206 Ariz.”

Hurd v. Hurd, 219 P.3d 258 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 9× “Owen held that this was an abuse of discretion that required remand to allow the family court to state on the record its findings in compliance with A.R.S. § 25-403. Id. at 421-22, ¶ 12, 79 P.”

Baker v. Meyer, 346 P.3d 998 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 18× “Here, the trial court failed to consider the child’s interest in having “substantial, frequent, meaningful and continuing parenting time” with his mother, § 25-103(B), or make any related findings pursuant to § 25-403. It also did not make any findings about the past and future…”

Show all 337 citing cases →

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(8) — 1 case

Runyard v. Runyard (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(A) — 193 cases

Backstrand v. Backstrand, 479 P.3d 846 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020). “2009) (in part, the rationale for A.R.S. § 25-403’s requirement for specific findings on the record is to provide a baseline for “any future petitions by either party based on ‘changed circumstances’”).”

Reid v. Reid, 213 P.3d 353 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009). “The family court stated that it was in the children's best interests that Mother retain sole legal custody and primary residential custody. However, as even Mother acknowledges, the court provided no explanation why this arrangement was in the children's best interests.”

Downs v. Scheffler, 80 P.3d 775 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). “¶ 9 We have previously held that a custody decision without the specific findings required by § 25-403 is deficient and, as a matter of law, constitutes an abuse of the family court’s discretion.”

Gutierrez v. Hon. fox/kivlighn, 394 P.3d 1096 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017). “*264 ¶ 11 On February 15, 2017, the superior court filed temporary orders, which included a section titled “Best Interest Findings: A.R.S. § 25-403.” In its order, the court found Father’s paternity “sufficiently established,” awarded Father parenting time to take place in…”

Hart v. Hart, 204 P.3d 441 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009). “Section 25-403(B) provides: “In a contested custody case, the court shall make specific findings on the record about all relevant factors and the reasons for which the decision is in the best interests of the child.”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(A)(1) — 37 cases

Baker v. Meyer, 346 P.3d 998 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015). “Here, the trial court failed to consider the child’s interest in having “substantial, frequent, meaningful and continuing parenting time” with his mother, § 25-103(B), or make any related findings pursuant to § 25-403. It also did not make any findings about the past and future…”

Barron v. Barron, 443 P.3d 977 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).

Mesa v. O'Connor, 563 P.3d 1179 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).

Aksamit v. Krahn, 227 P.3d 475 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(A)(10) — 1 case

Woyton v. Ward (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(A)(11) — 2 cases

Heroyan-Hamayak v. Hamayak (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017).

Devlin v. State Kingery (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(A)(2) — 20 cases

Barron v. Barron, 443 P.3d 977 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).

Heroyan-Hamayak v. Hamayak (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017).

Woyton v. Ward (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).

Okubena v. Montag (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(A)(3) — 13 cases

Owen v. Blackhawk, 79 P.3d 667 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). “§ 25-408(J)(3), (5), (6), and (8) and referenced A.R.S. § 25-403 (Supp.2002), which is a factor listed in A.”

Wright v. Wright (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).

Wiltbank v. Wiltbank (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021).

Jackson v. Rush (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024).

Dias v. Mady (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(A)(4) — 15 cases

In re the Marriage of Friedman, 397 P.3d 1063 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017).

Mesa v. O'Connor, 563 P.3d 1179 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).

Hieger v. Hieger (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).

Downum v. Downum (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(A)(5) — 23 cases

Jf v. Hon. como/cf (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).

Okubena v. Montag (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).

Burton-Anderson v. Anderson (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).

Demario v. Demario (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).

Prouty v. Hughes (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(A)(6) — 24 cases

Barron v. Barron, 443 P.3d 977 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).

Banales v. Smith, 26 P.3d 1190 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001).

Schritter v. Schritter (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(A)(7) — 10 cases

Riepe v. Riepe, 91 P.3d 312 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004).

Hinton v. Hinton (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020).

Dean v. Culp (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).

Heroyan-Hamayak v. Hamayak (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017).

Nickel v. Potter (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(A)(8) — 35 cases

Christopher K. v. Markaa S., 311 P.3d 1110 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013).

Deluna v. Petitto, 450 P.3d 1273 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “See A.R.S. §§ 25-403, -408(G), (I); Owen v. Blackhawk, 206 Ariz.”

Vera v. Hon rogers/chaidez, 433 P.3d 1190 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).

Peralta v. Peralta (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(A)(ll) — 1 case

Christopher K. v. Markaa S., 311 P.3d 1110 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(B) — 114 cases

Deluna v. Petitto, 450 P.3d 1273 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “See A.R.S. §§ 25-403, -408(G), (I); Owen v. Blackhawk, 206 Ariz.”

Murray v. Murray, 367 P.3d 78 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016). “A.R.S. § 25-403 (2016). ¶ 7 In turn, A.R.”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(C)(3) — 1 case

Davis v. Landon (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(D) — 1 case

Bolkan v. Donovan (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(H) — 1 case

Rewers v. Pope (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(H)(2) — 1 case

Eastman v. Eastman (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(J) — 6 cases

Owen v. Blackhawk, 79 P.3d 667 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). “§ 25-408(J)(3), (5), (6), and (8) and referenced A.R.S. § 25-403 (Supp.2002), which is a factor listed in A.”

Murray v. Murray, 367 P.3d 78 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016). “A.R.S. § 25-403 (2016). ¶ 7 In turn, A.R.”

In Re the Marriage of Diezsi, 38 P.3d 1189 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2002). “Following the review hearing in September, the trial court found Christina in contempt for various conduct; issued a detailed order about, among other matters, Christina’s drug activity; and admonished both parents to provide a “reasonably safe and healthy environment for the…”

Banales v. Smith, 26 P.3d 1190 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(K) — 1 case

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(L) — 1 case

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(P) — 1 case

Marriage of Higgins v. Higgins, 981 P.2d 134 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403(T) — 1 case

Owen v. Blackhawk, 79 P.3d 667 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). “§ 25-408(J)(3), (5), (6), and (8) and referenced A.R.S. § 25-403 (Supp.2002), which is a factor listed in A.”

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.