Opinion ID: 2392803
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: defendant's legal argument

Text: Defendant denies that paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Agreement are in any way ambiguous, or that they require any interpretation by the Court. Further, that the divorce judgment entered May 15, 1977 found as a fact that the Agreement fully resolved all. . . matters relating to . . . custody between the parties, concluding as a matter of law that the Agreement shall be ratified and approved by the court and incorporated by reference into the judgment. Defendant indicates that the plaintiff is actually urging split custody of the children and that such would not be in the best interests of the children. Further, that Utley v. Utley, supra , holds, in part, that generally, divided custody of a child of tender years is not favored.