Posts Categorized: Veil-piercing

Posted: February 17, 2021

Overlapping Ownership and Common Office Space Alone Insufficient to Support Veil Piercing Claim

On February 11, 2021, the First Department issued a decision in Suverant LLC v. Brainchild, Inc., 2021 NY Slip Op. 00918, holding that overlapping ownership and common office space alone were insufficient to support a veil piercing claim, explaining: The allegations in the complaint do not warrant piercing the corporate veil to hold KVK, Vepuri,... Read more »

Posted: November 14, 2020

Domination of Corporation Without Abuse of Corporate Form Insufficient Basis for Veil Piercing Claim

On October 30, 2020, Justice Schecter of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in W. & M. Operating, L.L.C. v. Bakhshi, 2020 NY Slip Op. 33597(U), domination of a corporation without the abuse of the corporate form is an insufficient basis for a veil piercing claim, explaining: Veil piercing on this record... Read more »

Posted: March 9, 2020

Individual Owner Can be Held Liable Under Veil Piercing Claim for the Torts of Owner’s Company

On February 21, 2020, Justice Schecter of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Forefront Partners LLC v. Omanoff, 2020 NY Slip Op. 30490(U), holding that an individual owner can be held liable under a veil-piercing theory for torts committed by the owner’s company, explaining: Forefront seeks dismissal of the breach of... Read more »

Posted: February 18, 2020

Veil Piercing Claim Against Parent Fails Because Plaintiff Was Aware of Subsidiary’s Financial Condition

On January 22, 2020, Justice Borrok of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in 165 E. 72nd Apt. Corp. v. Invite Health Stores, Inc., 2020 NY Slip Op. 30266(U), dismissing veil-piercing claims because the plaintiff knew of the defendant subsidiary’s financial condition, explaining: For its remaining claims, the Landlord seeks to pierce... Read more »

Posted: February 11, 2020

Veil Piercing Claim Upheld Based on Allegations of Fraudulent Inducement

On January 31, 2020, the Fourth Department issued a decision in Clark Rigging & Rental Corp. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 2020 NY Slip Op. 00760, upholding a veil piercing claim based on alleged fraudulent inducement, explaining: Affording the allegations in the complaint every possible favorable inference, we conclude that plaintiff sufficiently alleged that Tri-Krete... Read more »

Posted: January 13, 2020

Veil Piercing Claim Rejected; Alleged Domination and Control Unrelated to Basis of Claim

On December 18, 2019, Justice Ostrager of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Lam Pearl St. Hotel, LLC v. Golden Pearl Constr., LLC, 2019 NY Slip Op. 33750(U), rejecting a veil piercing claim because the alleged domination and control were unrelated to the basis for the plaintiff’s claim, explaining: Plaintiff Lam... Read more »

Posted: October 21, 2019

Court Rejects Veil-Piercing Claim

On March 21, 2019, Judge Wilson of the Bergen County Superior Court (Law Division) issued a decision in Cajoeco LLC v. Bensi Enterprises, LLC, Docket No. BER-L-3477-16, rejecting veil-piercing claims, explaining: It is well settled New Jersey law that a corporation is a separate entity from its shareholders and that a primary reason for incorporation... Read more »

Posted: September 26, 2018

Court Analyzes Question of Successor Liability

On August 22, 2018, Judge Vignuolo of the Middlesex County Superior Court (Law Division) issued a decision in Babulal v. Dynamic Metals Processing, Inc., Docket No. L-1508-14, analyzing whether two defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing claims based on successor liability, explaining: We turn now to the substance of Gary Metal and Gary Machinery‚Äôs... Read more »