▶ Video explainer coming soon
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court's decision. This means the higher court agreed with the original ruling. The court said Sherwin's claim of being the custodial parent went against the terms of the 2019 stipulation both parties had signed. Because of this, his request for child support was properly denied. The court also found his other arguments either lacked merit or were not properly raised for review. The higher court did not award any costs or fees to either side.
Sherwin and Semra Brandford were going through a divorce with ancillary issues like child support. In 2019, the couple signed a stipulation, a written agreement, about their child. Later, Sherwin argued he was the custodial parent and asked the court for child support. He also asked the court to hold Semra in contempt for not following the 2019 agreement. A lower court denied these requests in 2020. Sherwin later asked the court to review that decision again, called a motion to renew. He also sought contempt findings related to other court orders. The Supreme Court, Kings County, stuck with its earlier decision in 2023. Sherwin appealed this ruling to a higher court.
The main question was whether the lower court was right to deny Sherwin's request for child support. He claimed he was the child's custodial parent. But this claim did not match what the parties had agreed to in their signed 2019 stipulation. The appeals court also looked at whether other requests, like contempt motions and a request to amend a prior order, were properly denied.
This case shows that signed agreements between parents often guide how courts decide custody and support issues. Courts tend to hold both parents to the terms they agreed to in writing. It also highlights how appeals courts review whether lower courts followed prior agreements correctly, especially when one parent later disputes their role.
Talk to a licensed family law lawyer in New York.