Widowed Dad Breaks Down In Tears After Winning Bitter Custody Battle Against Grandparents — Just One Day Before His Wife’s Death Anniversary

Apr 28, 2026 by apost team

Rhode Island father Scott Naso, a narcotics detective with the Middletown Police Department, won a closely watched grandparents' visitation case after a Family Court judge dismissed a petition from his late wife's parents, Dr. Siavash Ghoreishi and Dr. Jila Khorsand. The dispute centered on whether the couple should receive court-ordered visits with Naso's 4-year-old daughter, Laila, after the death of Naso's wife, Shahrzad "Sherry" Naso, from metastasized breast cancer in April 2024.

Judge Felix Gill ruled on April 23, 2026, in Kent County Family Court in Warwick, Rhode Island, that the grandparents had not met the legal standard required to override the decision of a fit parent. Rhode Island law allows grandparents to seek visitation, but it requires clear and convincing evidence that a parent's refusal is unreasonable and that court intervention is necessary. Gill also acknowledged the emotional weight of the case, saying, "This was a tragic case. Rather than celebrating Sherry's life, they spent time arguing and fighting in this court."

The decision did not leave every issue in Naso's favor. The judge held him in contempt for stopping supervised visits in January 2025 without first asking the court to change the temporary order. Naso was fined $2,500, and each side was ordered to cover its own legal fees. The ruling came after a costly legal battle that left Naso with over $500,000 in legal fees.

For Naso, the ruling came after a public fight over the role his late wife's parents should play in Laila's life. For the grandparents, the case was an effort to preserve a bond with the child of their deceased daughter. For the court, it became a test of how grief, family connection and parental authority should be balanced when adults disagree about what is best for a child.

The case drew attention beyond one family because it touched on a sensitive legal question: when can a court step into a child's family life over the objection of a fit parent? Naso argued that he had a constitutional right to decide who could spend time with his daughter. His legal team pointed to the U.S. Supreme Court's 2000 decision in Troxel v. Granville, which recognized a parent's fundamental right to make decisions about a child's care, custody and control.

Gill said a relationship with the maternal grandparents could benefit Laila, especially because they connect her to her late mother. Still, the court found that this potential benefit was not enough under Rhode Island's statute. The law gives weight to a child's best interests, but it also requires respect for a fit parent's decision unless the petitioners can overcome a strong legal presumption.

A secret recording became an important factor in the judge's reasoning. According to The Boston Globe, the recording was made during a June 2024 visit by a family friend of the grandparents and later submitted as evidence in court. Gill described it as a "fatal flaw" in their case because it supported Naso's distrust rather than disproving it.

Naso has accused his former in-laws, both retired physicians, of interfering with Sherry's medical care and of inappropriate medical involvement with Laila. Ghoreishi and Khorsand have disputed those allegations, and the court's visitation decision did not determine whether those accusations were true. The ruling instead focused on whether the grandparents had proven that the court should override Naso's refusal.

The outcome leaves Naso with primary authority over his daughter's relationships, while also showing how painful family disputes can become when grief, trust and parental rights collide.

apost.com

This case shows how one family dispute can raise questions far beyond the courtroom. Where should the line be drawn between grandparents' rights and a parent's authority? Pass this along to others and invite them to weigh in.