Search for: "Veil Corporate, LLC" Results 381 - 400 of 479
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Jul 2010, 7:55 am by Steven Peck
This is very similar to the notion of piercing the corporate veil (aside from certain technical distinctions that are being ignored for the purpose of this discussion). [read post]
27 Jun 2010, 8:15 am by Larry Ribstein
The LLC, said the court without any basis or citation, is “a type of corporate entity. [read post]
12 Jun 2010, 6:15 am by Steven Peck
Many times, a creditor will ask a court to ignore the liability protection offered by the corporation or LLC status of a business. [read post]
27 May 2010, 9:43 am
Generally, a party seeking to pierce the corporate veil must show: (1) complete domination and control of the subsidiary by the parent with respect to the transaction at issue; and (2) that such domination was used to commit a fraud or wrong against the plaintiff that resulted in the plaintiff's injury (see Matter of Morris v New York State Dept. of Taxation & Fin. , 82 NY2d 135, 141 [1993]; Do Gooder Prods., Inc. v American Jewish Theatre, Inc., 66 AD3d 527, 528 [1st Dept… [read post]
25 May 2010, 4:47 am by admin
In addition to the question of piercing the corporate veil, if you sign a contract—a lease, a mortgage, a credit card application for the corporation, you may be expected to personally guarantee the contract; if so, you will still be personally liable for the debt. [read post]
22 May 2010, 8:53 am by Duncan H. Adams and Thomas J. Mihill
It will help limit misunderstandings between members, ensure that the business is run by the rules established by the owners (not by the default rules of Georgia statute) and it will protect the company’s limited liability status (by preventing "piercing the corporate veil"). [read post]
17 May 2010, 7:24 pm by John Buford
  As the Court stated unequivocally, "Piercing the corporate veil alone is insufficient to establish mandatory jurisdiction. [read post]
13 May 2010, 1:04 pm by Eric
If you're looking for a paper topic, I'd love to see some clarification about when courts will pierce the corporate veil in copyright cases and how that compares to corporate veil-piercing in other tort contexts. [read post]
13 May 2010, 5:58 am by Jeff Lipshaw
  I regularly use schematics in class to show the relationship of partners to partnerships, members to LLCs, shareholders to corporations, etc. [read post]
24 Apr 2010, 1:35 pm by Francis G.X. Pileggi
  If the LLC agreement is silent on the issue, the officers of an LLC owe the same fiduciary duties as a director and controlling shareholder of a corporation. [read post]
12 Apr 2010, 9:13 am by Raymond McKenzie
SSA, LLC, (2010) it was held that the parent of a company may not be held liable in Maryland for the acts of a subsidiary corporation under the corporate veil piercing doctrine without a showing of fraud or a necessity to enforce a paramount equity. [read post]
5 Apr 2010, 2:41 pm
The Court disagreed, and applied the veil piercing doctrine to hold that ABM was not a proper party to the suit because Plaintiffs failed to show or plead fraud or a similar inequity.The Court also agreed with the Corporate Defendants that SSA, LLC, the predecessor to SSA, Inc. was not a party to the case because it cannot be held directly liable for its hiring and training of the two individual defendants who committed the crimes. [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 6:22 pm by Kellen
  If the plaintiff’s attorney learns that you have not kept your minutes, do not have an operating agreement or there is no document showing your ownership interest in the LLC, then a Florida court could pierce the corporate veil of the LLC. [read post]
23 Mar 2010, 12:35 pm by Schwartz & Perry
In a landmark case in March, 2008, The New York Supreme Court held that Geneva Corporation could successfully pierce the corporate veil of American Lending Services, LLC and decided that Mr. [read post]
19 Mar 2010, 4:05 pm by Francis G.X. Pileggi
In addition, the Court rejected the argument that the likelihood of filing for bankruptcy if the nullification claim prevailed would make the effort futile, because the nullification of the cancellation would still facilitate, for example, the ability of the plaintiffs to pursue their related efforts to pierce the corporate veil of the dissolved entities. [read post]
5 Mar 2010, 1:26 pm by michael
Remember that single member or “closely held” entities are subject to “piercing of the corporate veil”. [read post]