Case Title: Robino v. Robino, III

Citation: 

Docket Number: 453, 2017

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2018-04-12T00:00:00Z

Document:
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. 
 
 
O R D E R 
 
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 
2 
 
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