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 »
Blogs
Posts Categorized: Veil-piercing
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 »
Court Allows Reverse Veil-Piercing Claims to Go Forward
On July 16, 2020, Justice Scarpulla of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Ezra v. Wilton Group, Inc., 2020 NY Slip Op. 32351(U), allowing reverse veil-piercing claims to go forward, explaining: In opposition, defendants first argue that, because most of the defendants are Delaware entities, New York’s choice of law dictates... Read more »
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 »
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 »
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 »
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 »
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 »
Bank Holding Company Not Liable for Acts of its Banking Subsidiary
On September 5, 2019, Justice Scarpulla of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Akhtar v. JPMorgan Chase & Co., 2019 NY Slip Op. 32646(U), holding that a bank holding company was not liable for the acts of its banking subsidiary, explaining: There is no dispute that JP Morgan Chase is a... Read more »
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’s... Read more »