The Father’s petition was dismissed after he sought to enforce a prior written agreement that had never been submitted to the Court for approval. The Court granted the Mother’s motion to dismiss, finding that although an agreement between the parties existed, it was never presented for judicial adoption. As a result, the agreement did not constitute an enforceable court order, leaving no legal basis for enforcement.
Background & Key Facts:
CASE / Strategy:
Pursuant to Rule 69 of the Arizona Rules of Family Law Procedure, a written agreement between the parties is binding as between them, but it is not binding on the Court unless and until it is formally adopted. Because the parties’ agreement was never submitted for or adopted by the Court, it did not rise to the level of an enforceable court order. Accordingly, there was no valid order for the Court to enforce as requested by Father, and dismissal of the petition was proper.
Outcome:
The Father’s petition was dismissed after he sought to enforce a prior written agreement that had never been submitted to the Court for approval. The Court granted the Mother’s motion to dismiss, finding that although an agreement between the parties existed, it was never presented for judicial adoption. As a result, the agreement did not constitute an enforceable court order, leaving no legal basis for enforcement.
Client Impact:
Mother avoided protracted litigation, which would have otherwise included Father’s request to expand parenting time to 50/50, where Mother had otherwise been the child’s primary physical custodial parent.
