Robino v. Robino, III
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE CHARLES J. ROBINO, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. FRANK ROBINO, III, Plaintiff Below, Appellee. § § § § § § § § § § § § No. 453, 2017 Court Below—Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware C.A. No. 10871 Submitted: April 11, 2018 Decided: April 12, 2018 Before STRINE, Chief Justice; SEITZ and TRAYNOR, Justices. ORDER This 12th day of April, 2018, after careful consideration of the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal, the Court concludes that the judgment below should be affirmed on the basis of and for the reasons assigned by the Court of Chancery in its well-reasoned decision dated August 16, 2017. The appellant’s contention that the Court of Chancery should have conducted an evidentiary hearing to assess his claim that he was incapacitated by intoxication when he participated in the mediation that resulted in the settlement agreement at issue was not fairly presented to the Court of Chancery for its consideration in the first instance and need not be considered in this appeal. It is clear, however, that the Court of Chancery did not abuse its discretion when it ruled on the appellee’s motion to enforce the settlement agreement without an evidentiary hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Court of Chancery be AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Gary F. Traynor Justice 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
