Rhode Island judge dismisses grandparents' bid for visitation rights

A Rhode Island family court judge has dismissed a two-year fight by two grandparents seeking visitation with their 4-year-old granddaughter, a ruling that underscores how sharply grandparent-visitation laws can collide with a surviving parent’s authority after a spouse dies.

Judge Felix Gill threw out the petition on April 23, 2026, after 18 days of testimony that began in October 2025 and resumed in April 2026. The case centered on Scott Naso, a Middletown Police Department detective, and his late wife’s parents, retired doctors Dr. Siavash Ghoreishi and Dr. Jila Khorsand, who had sought court-ordered access to their granddaughter, Laila. Gill found the grandparents had not met the legal standard required to override the decision of a fit parent and did not prove that Naso was being unreasonable in refusing visitation.

The dispute began after Shahrzad “Sherry” Naso died in April 2024 from metastasized breast cancer. Her parents filed their case in July 2024, setting off a bitter legal battle that spread beyond a private family conflict and into broader questions about parental rights, medical trust and the state’s power to intervene. Reporting around the case said Naso accused the grandparents of medical mistakes that contributed to Sherry Naso’s death and alleged they had also sickened Laila through medical care.

Under Rhode Island law, grandparents may seek visitation, but the statute gives a parent’s decision a presumption of reasonableness that can be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence. The law also allows courts to award reasonable attorney’s fees against grandparents if a petition is denied. Gill’s ruling left that framework intact and reaffirmed the high bar grandparents must clear when a surviving parent objects, especially after the death of the child’s other parent.

The case has drawn attention because it reaches into the constitutional territory first sketched by the U.S. Supreme Court in Troxel v. Granville, which recognized a parent’s fundamental right to direct the care, custody and control of a child. In practical terms, the decision may matter far beyond Kent County: in families where one parent has died, grandparents may see themselves as essential to a child’s stability, while the surviving parent may view outside court-ordered visitation as an intrusion on hard-won authority.

Naso said the fight had already cost him more than $500,000 in legal bills and related expenses, and he said he was still dealing with contempt and attorney-fee issues after prevailing. For families watching similar disputes unfold nationwide, the ruling is another reminder that grief can quickly turn into litigation, and that courts remain wary of replacing a surviving parent’s judgment with a grandparent’s claim to access.