Posts Categorized: Veil-piercing

Posted: March 5, 2018

Judge Korman Grants Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction in Action to Enforce Settlement of Prior Federal ERISA Lawsuit

Posted by Solomon N. Klein, Litigation Partner It is often advisable when a case is settled to have the same court retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement in the event of a breach. However, as illustrated in a decision last week by District Judge Edward R. Korman*, the enforcement of a settlement agreement is… Read more »

Posted: May 18, 2017

Court Will Ignore Corporate Form When it is Used to Perpetrate a Fraud

On April 7, 2017, Justice Dufficy of the Queens County Commercial Division issued a decision in Nandlal v. Al-Pros Construction, Inc., 2017 NY Slip Op. 50620(U), disregarding the corporate form because it was used to perpetrate a fraud, explaining: Having been barred from performing home-improvement work in the State of New York, the individual defendant,… Read more »

Posted: October 24, 2016

Allegations of Deceit or Wrongdoing Necessary for Veil Piercing Claim

On October 20, 2016, the First Department issued a decision in Pensmore Investments, LLC. v Gruppo, Levey & Co., 2016 NY Slip Op. 06899, holding that allegations of deceit or wrongdoing are necessary to allege a veil piercing claim, explaining: Plaintiff established a likelihood of success on its veil piercing claim by showing that defendants… Read more »

Posted: June 24, 2016

Control and Domination Alone Insufficient to Justify Alter Ego Liability

On June 14, 2016, the First Department issued a decision in Cornwall Management Ltd. v. Kambolin, 2016 NY Slip Op. 04680, dismissing a claim based on alter ego liability, explaining: The allegations that defendants Kambolin and Atlant Capital Holdings controlled and dominated defendant Thor United are insufficient to state a cause of action for alter… Read more »

Posted: June 2, 2016

Corporate Veil Pierced Only Where Owner’s Complete Domination Used to Commit Fraud or Wrong

On May 31, 2016, the First Department issued a decision in JTS Trading Ltd. v. Trinity White City Ventures Ltd., 2016 NY Slip Op. 04138, holding that a plaintiff had failed adequately to plead a basis for piercing the corporate veil, explaining: The court properly declined to pierce the corporate veil to attach the properties… Read more »

Posted: February 26, 2016

Plaintiff Not Required to Plead Elements of Alter Ego Liability With Particularity

On February 16, 2016, the First Department issued a decision in 2406-12 Amsterdam Associates LLC v. Alianza LLC, 2016 NY Slip Op 01110, holding that a plaintiff was not required to plead the elements of alter ego liability with particularity, explaining: Plaintiff was not required to plead the elements of alter ego liability with the… Read more »

Posted: November 26, 2015

Plaintiff Fails to State Claim for Alter Ego or Successor Liability

On November 16, 2015, Justice Scarpulla of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Weinheimer v. Lower Brule Community Development Enterprise, LLC, 2015 NY Slip Op. 32168(U), dismissing claims based on alter ego or successor liability, explaining: Those seeking to pierce a corporate veil of course bear a heavy burden of showing… Read more »

Posted: February 27, 2015

Acquiror of Corporate Assets Liable for Corporation’s Torts Under De Facto Merger Doctrine

On December 22, 2014, Justice Walker of the 8th Judicial District Commercial Division issued a decision in Precision Process, Inc. v. Smith, 2014 NY Slip Op. 33460(U), holding that the acquiror of a corporation’s assets was liable for the corporation’s debts under the de facto merger doctrine. In Precision Process, the court granted the plaintiff… Posted in Commercial, Judgment and Collection, Veil-piercing

Posted: April 17, 2014

Judge Weinstein Grants Summary Judgment To Contract Creditor Piercing The Corporate Veil

In an April 4, 2014 judgment and order in Jiaxing Globillion Import and Export Co. v. Argington, Inc., 11 CV 6291 (JBW) (E.D.N.Y. Apr. 4, 2014), Judge Jack B. Weinstein granted summary judgment for plaintiff and pierced the corporate veil to hold one of the corporate defendant’s two shareholders liable for the company’s breach of contract…. Read more »