Christopher K. v. Markaa S., 233 Ariz. 297

Background

Parents divorced after living in Minnesota; mother obtained sole physical custody and moved with two children to Arizona; father remained in Minnesota.
Father petitioned in Arizona (2011) to modify custody and relocate children to Minnesota, alleging mother failed to protect children from physical abuse by her husband (stepfather).
A custody evaluator interviewed parties and children; children reported incidents (shoving against wall, forced showering, sleeping in bathtub, being struck with a shovel handle); stepfather admitted to several incidents to the evaluator and family counselor.
The custody evaluator found the stepfather’s discipline "concerning" and recommended awarding custody to father, though she later equivocated after family counseling progress; the family counselor testified the family was improving.
The superior court admitted the evaluator’s report, relied on it by incorporation, denied father’s petition, and ordered mother to attend parenting classes; father appealed.
The appellate court vacated and remanded, holding the trial court failed to (1) expressly consider whether the conduct constituted domestic violence and treat it as a factor of primary importance under A.R.S. § 25-403.03, and (2) make independent credibility- and fact-based findings rather than adopting the evaluator’s conclusions.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether court must expressly determine if physical discipline rises to domestic violence	Father: court must decide whether stepfather’s acts constitute domestic violence and treat it as primary importance	Mother: trial court’s adoption of evaluator’s report was sufficient; no explicit finding required	Court: must expressly determine whether conduct is domestic violence and, if found, treat it as a primary factor under §25-403.03(B)
Whether court may rely solely on custody evaluator’s report for best-interests findings	Father: court cannot delegate its factfinding; must independently weigh evidence and assess credibility	Mother: evaluator’s thorough report and testimony sufficed to support findings	Court: trial court abused discretion by simply incorporating evaluator’s report; it must make independent findings and assess credibility
Whether domestic-violence finding is dispositive to deny custody modification	Father: domestic violence evidence should weigh heavily toward modification	Mother: progress in counseling and evaluator’s equivocation justify denial	Court: domestic violence is not necessarily dispositive but is of "primary importance" and denial requires specific, on-the-record justification
Whether absence of specific statutory-factor findings requires reversal	Father: lack of findings prevented meaningful review and future baseline	Mother: failure to object below waives issue	Court: specific findings required by §25-403(B); absence is an abuse of discretion and not waived by failure to object

Key Cases Cited

Pridgeon v. Superior Court (LaMarca), 134 Ariz. 177, 655 P.2d 1 (App. 1982) (standard of appellate review for custody decisions)
Black v. Black, 114 Ariz. 282, 560 P.2d 800 (1977) (change-in-circumstances and best-interests two-step for custody modification)
DePasquale v. Superior Court (Thrasher), 181 Ariz. 333, 890 P.2d 628 (App. 1995) (court cannot delegate best-interests determination to expert)
Nold v. Nold, 232 Ariz. 270, 304 P.3d 1093 (App. 2013) (custody evaluator’s report is not a substitute for court findings)
Owen v. Blackhawk, 206 Ariz. 418, 79 P.3d 667 (App. 2003) (requirement for specific findings on custody factors)
In re Marriage of Diezsi, 201 Ariz. 524, 38 P.3d 1189 (App. 2002) (failure to make specific findings is abuse of discretion)
Jesus M. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 203 Ariz. 278, 53 P.3d 203 (App. 2002) (trial court best positioned to weigh credibility in child-related proceedings)
In re Marriage of Reid, 222 Ariz. 204, 213 P.3d 353 (App. 2009) (findings requirement not waived by failure to object; needed for appellate review)