Legal Opinion · Dissent

delCastillo v. delCastillo

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 2, 1992No. 3254Published

1DissentPopovich, Judge

I must respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion that the lower court correctly interpreted the settlement agreement to require Dr. Juan J. delCastillo to pay for his son’s Bachelor’s Degree only. Based on Dr. delCastillo’s testimony, I am absolutely convinced that he is obligated to fund his son’s undergraduate and graduate studies.

When interpreting a settlement agreement, the trial court is the sole fact-finder and, absent an abuse of discretion, we will not usurp that function. Nitkiewicz v. Nitkiewicz, 369 Pa.Super. 504, 507, 535 A.2d 664, 665 (1988), appeal denied, 520 Pa. 589,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Griffin v. GriffinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  2. Brown v. BrownSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  3. Nitkiewicz v. NitkiewiczSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API