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

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-527 (2026)

Child support; overpayment; reimbursement

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

25-527. Child support; overpayment; reimbursement

A. An obligor whose obligation to pay support has terminated may file a request for reimbursement against the obligee for support payments made in excess of the amount ordered.  The obligor must file the request with the clerk of the superior court within twenty-four months after the termination of the obligation.

B. The court may enter a judgment for reimbursement against the obligee if the court finds that the obligor's obligation to pay support has terminated and that all arrearages and interest on arrearages have been satisfied.  The court shall send a copy of the judgment to the department or its agent for title IV-D cases.

C. The obligee must pay the judgment directly to the obligor and not through the clerk of the superior court or the support payment clearinghouse.

D. A judgment entered pursuant to this section does not constitute a support judgment and is enforceable only in the same manner as a civil judgment.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2015–2026 · leading case: In Re the Marriage of Allen, 386 P.3d 1287 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re the Marriage of Allen, 386 P.3d 1287 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 4× “Currently, AR.S. § 25-527 allows an obligor to seek reimbursement of excess support payments, 4 ¶ 12 It is also unclear whether Clay involved any overpayment as a result of payments from the obligor’s personal funds.”
Marinello v. Glover (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 8× “Judgment for Child Support Overpayments ¶11 The family court may enter a judgment for reimbursement against an obligation for support payments made in excess of the amount ordered “if the court finds that the obligor's obligation to pay support has terminated and that all…”
Amadore v. Lifgren, 431 P.3d 579 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 6× “Reimbursement for Overpayments ¶21 Relying on A.R.S. § 25-527, Mother argues the superior court erred in ordering Father’s ongoing child support obligation reduced to $500 per month until he is reimbursed for the amounts he overpaid Mother.”
Brucklier v. Brucklier, 516 P.3d 526 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 6× “But citing A.R.S. § 25-527, the court determined that it could not order reimbursement for the overpayment until after Father’s child support obligation terminated when the children reached majority.”
Tupper v. Tupper (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 8× “TUPPER Decision of the Court DISCUSSION ¶5 Father argues that the family court erred by finding that A.R.S. § 25-527 does not provide for reimbursement of his child support payments.”
Nebeker v. Harris (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 4× “¶21 Father argues that the overpayment remedy provided in A.R.S. § 25-527(A) is not the only option available to reimburse a parent who overpays child support.”
Downum v. Downum (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 25-527(B). Husband’s income withholding order for child support was terminated in September 2018, and their 18-year-old child graduated from high school in June 2018.”
Thomas v. Kelly (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 25-527(A), (B) (2019). ¶7 Mother does not challenge the accuracy of the June 2018 report showing the overpayment.”
State v. McEvoy (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “See also A.R.S. § 25-527(A) (same but for petitions to modify provisions within decrees of dissolution).”
Love v. Love (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 25-527(A). C. We Vacate Father’s Attorney’s Fees awards.”
Webber v. Webber (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “§ 25-527(B) ("The court may enter a judgment for reimbursement against the obligee if the court finds that the obligor's obligation to pay support has terminated .”
Lopez v. Tinnean (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “And it is not apparent whether the court holds the authority to issue such a 2 Mother does not argue that the reimbursement order violated A.R.S. § 25-527(B). Any error about that issue is waived.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-527(A) — 6 cases
In Re the Marriage of Allen, 386 P.3d 1287 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016). “Currently, AR.S. § 25-527 allows an obligor to seek reimbursement of excess support payments, 4 ¶ 12 It is also unclear whether Clay involved any overpayment as a result of payments from the obligor’s personal funds.”
Nebeker v. Harris (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021). “¶21 Father argues that the overpayment remedy provided in A.R.S. § 25-527(A) is not the only option available to reimburse a parent who overpays child support.”
Thomas v. Kelly (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “See A.R.S. § 25-527(A), (B) (2019). ¶7 Mother does not challenge the accuracy of the June 2018 report showing the overpayment.”
State v. McEvoy (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “See also A.R.S. § 25-527(A) (same but for petitions to modify provisions within decrees of dissolution).”
Love v. Love (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020). “See A.R.S. § 25-527(A). C. We Vacate Father’s Attorney’s Fees awards.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-527(B) — 5 cases
Marinello v. Glover (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018). “Judgment for Child Support Overpayments ¶11 The family court may enter a judgment for reimbursement against an obligation for support payments made in excess of the amount ordered “if the court finds that the obligor's obligation to pay support has terminated and that all…”
Downum v. Downum (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018). “A.R.S. § 25-527(B). Husband’s income withholding order for child support was terminated in September 2018, and their 18-year-old child graduated from high school in June 2018.”
Amadore v. Lifgren, 431 P.3d 579 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018). “Reimbursement for Overpayments ¶21 Relying on A.R.S. § 25-527, Mother argues the superior court erred in ordering Father’s ongoing child support obligation reduced to $500 per month until he is reimbursed for the amounts he overpaid Mother.”
Webber v. Webber (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024). “§ 25-527(B) ("The court may enter a judgment for reimbursement against the obligee if the court finds that the obligor's obligation to pay support has terminated .”
Lopez v. Tinnean (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025). “And it is not apparent whether the court holds the authority to issue such a 2 Mother does not argue that the reimbursement order violated A.R.S. § 25-527(B). Any error about that issue is waived.”
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.