Piercing the Corporate Veil, Alter Ego and Successor Liability. Kenneth E. Chase

Similar documents
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION. No. 12 C 1856 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Plaintiff, : : : : John Sgaliordich is an individual investor who alleges that various investment

Amsterdam Assoc. LLC v Alianza LLC 2014 NY Slip Op 30156(U) January 15, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge:

Defendants x The following papers having been read on the motion: [numbered

Siegal v Pearl Capital Rivis Ventures LLC 2018 NY Slip Op 30256(U) February 13, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

BASIC CONFLICTS OF INTEREST RULES

Powell Communications, LLC v Ideacast, Inc NY Slip Op 32285(U) August 17, 2010 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /09 Judge:

Responding to a Complaint: Maryland

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

... BURBERRY LIMITED and BURBERRY USA, Plaintiffs,

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Bullet Proof Guaranties

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. Case No CIV-LENARD/TORRES

Trustees of the N.Y. City Dist. Council of Carpenters Pension Fund v Centurion Cos., Inc NY Slip Op 31265(U) July 6, 2016 Supreme Court, New

Case 1:14-cv JSR Document 58 Filed 12/01/14 Page 1 of 7. Lead plaintiffs Joseph Ebin and Yeruchum Jenkins bring this

Securing the Delinquent Account & Alternative Legal Theories to Collect on Delinquent Accounts

Understanding Legal Terminology in NFA Arbitration Cases

JMS AN's, LLC v Fast Food Enters., LLC 2011 NY Slip Op 33900(U) September 28, 2011 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /09 Judge:

Beneficially Held Corporations and Personal Jurisdiction Over Individuals

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Beware Distinctions Between Veil Piercing And Alter Ego

DISPUTES BETWEEN OPERATORS AND NON-OPERATORS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division

17 th Annual New York City Bankruptcy Conference: Governed by New York Law? Considering the Impact of New York State Law in Bankruptcy Matters

Matter of B.R.M. Concrete Inc. v Portland Tr.-Mix, Inc NY Slip Op 31689(U) June 29, 2010 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

JSBarkats PLLC v GoCom Corp. Inc NY Slip Op 32182(U) October 26, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Eileen

THOMAS CATANESE Defendants x

Case 3:15-cv AET-TJB Document 58 Filed 03/15/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID: 646

Oorah, Inc. v Covista Communications, Inc NY Slip Op 32484(U) September 25, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2011

August 30, A. Introduction

Re: International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. (ISDA) Issues for New Jurisdictions

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE

Noto v Northeastern Fuel NY Inc NY Slip Op 31538(U) July 15, 2013 Sup Ct, Richmond County Docket Number: /2011 Judge: Joseph J.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM v. Case No. 5D

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/26/ :25 PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 10 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/26/2014

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION COUNTY OF WAKE 08 CVS STROOCK, STROOCK & LAVAN LLP, ) Plaintiff ) ) v. ) ORDER AND OPINION ) ROBERT DORF, ) Defendant )

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Fifth Circuit Rejects Breach of Fiduciary Duty and Fraudulent Transfer Claims

STATE OF FLORIDA OFFICE OF FINANCIAL REGULATION APPLICATION FOR CONSUMER FINANCE COMPANY LICENSE CHAPTER 516, FLORIDA STATUTES

v No Oakland Circuit Court TUBBY S SUB SHOPS INC. and JB LC No CB DEVELOPMENT LLC,

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/22/ :39 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/22/2016

Fogel v American Intl. Indus. for Clubman 2017 NY Slip Op 30129(U) January 18, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2016 Judge:

Southern Advanced Materials, LLC v Abrams 2019 NY Slip Op 30041(U) January 4, 2019 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge:

Alksom Realty LLC v Baranik NY Slip Op 50869(U) Decided on June 9, Supreme Court, Kings County. Demarest, J.

Carmody v City of New York 2018 NY Slip Op 33201(U) December 12, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2016 Judge: Alexander M.

Case 0:14-cv WPD Document 28 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/05/2014 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 1:13-cv TPG Document 21 Filed 06/02/14 Page 1 of 15 : : : : Defendants. :

Account No. APEX CLEARING CORPORATION AND/OR BROKER DEALERS FOR WHICH IT CLEARS

Status of RMBS Litigations

In-House Ethics: Important Questions. Dorsey & Whitney. Dorsey & Whitney LLP. All Rights Reserved.

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

Lattarulo v Industrial Refrig., Inc NY Slip Op 32423(U) May 22, 2018 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: /17 Judge: Thomas

ANSWER TO COUNTERCLAIM BUSINESS DISPUTE

Liberty American Ins. Group, Inc. v. WestPoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 199 F.Supp.2d 1271 (M.D.Fla. 2001)

New York Court of Appeals Permits Extraterritorial Seizure of Assets in Aid of Judgments

This Webcast Will Begin Shortly

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Limitations Act, 2002: Issues of Concern to Trustees in Bankruptcy

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 05/02/ :32 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 8 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/02/2016

Maximize Your Contract s Exculpatory Provisions

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

COMES NOW, Marc Anayas, appearing for a specific and limited purpose only, by

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Debtor. Case No Chapter 7

CASE NO. 1D J. Nixon Daniel, III and Jack W. Lurton, III of Beggs & Lane, RLLP, Pensacola, for Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

Environmental Settlements in Bankruptcy: Practice Pointers for the Business Lawyer. A. Overview of the Bankruptcy Process

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA THIRD DISTRICT CASE NO. 3D Lower Tribunal Case No.: CA-21

Case 1:04-cv RHB Document 171 Filed 08/11/2005 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Schuyler v Sotheby's Intl. Realty, Inc NY Slip Op 32384(U) October 2, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2011 Judge: O.

PlainSite. Legal Document. New York Southern District Court Case No. 1:17-cv MacGregor v. Milost Global, Inc. et al. Document 1.

LOFARO & REISER, L.L.P. COUNSELLORS AT LAW 55 HUDSON STREET HACKENSACK, NEW JERSEY (201) FACSIMILE: (201)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO CIV-COHN/SELTZER

a federally chartered corporation RECITALS

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/09/ :12 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 29 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/09/2016

Polycom, Inc. Settlement c/o Garden City Group, LLC PO Box 10281

Barbara D. Underwood, for appellant. Gerson Zweifach, for respondent. This appeal arises out of compensation paid by the New

CASE NO. 1D John R. Dowd, Jr., and Charles G. Brackins of The Dowd Law Firm, P.A., Ft. Walton Beach, for Appellant.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No September Term, 2014 GRINDSTONE CAPITAL, LLC MICHAEL KENT ATKINSON

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2008

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

PROOF OF CLAIM AND RELEASE. Address: City: Zip Code:

336 S.W.3d 83 (Ky. 2011), 2010-SC MR, Hathaway v. Eckerle Page S.W.3d 83 (Ky. 2011) Velessa HATHAWAY, Appellant, v. Audra J.

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/18/ :14 AM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 11 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/18/2016 EXHIBIT C

Zadar Universal Corp. v Lemonis 2018 NY Slip Op 33125(U) November 26, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2018 Judge: Gerald

No CELESTINE ELLIOTT, et al., Respondents. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 03/02/18 Page 1 of 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT January Term 2010

Submitted December 6, 2017 Decided. Before Judges Koblitz and Manahan.

PROOF OF CLAIM AND RELEASE PART I - CLAIMANT IDENTIFICATION... 2 PART II - SCHEDULE OF TRANSACTIONS IN KINROSS COMMON STOCK... 3

CERTIFICATE OF DOCUMENT FILED

Transcription:

Piercing the Corporate Veil, Alter Ego and Successor Liability Kenneth E. Chase

Basic Principles A. Limitation of liability is a cornerstone of the law of corporations. B. Officers of a corporation are ordinarily not personally liable for the acts and obligations of a corporation or LLC. C. Exception #1: Establish personal liability or coobligation of another corporate entity at the outset. D. Exception #2: Pierce the corporate veil. E. Exception #3: Alter ego and successor liability. 2

Exception #1: Establish Personal Liability or Co-Obligation of Corporate Parent Advise your client to assess the creditworthiness of its business partner / counterparty. Look at the party name on the contract Verify viability and age of corporate form Secretary of state search, D&B report, credit check Assess web presence Reference check Was this entity recently created for purposes of a single transaction? Watch out for the single purpose entity shell 3

Exception #1: Establish Personal Liability or Co-Obligation of Corporate Parent Advise your client to draft the contract in a manner advantageous to its business interests. Co-obligor (one signature, double liability) Reasonable attorney s fees in circumstance of breach Interest, late fees Acceleration clause Jury waiver / class action waiver No arbitration or mandatory mediation clause 4

Exception #2: Pierce the Corporate Veil New York Complete Dominion and Control A shareholder may be held liable for corporate debts under a veil-piercing theory upon a showing that he or she exercised complete dominion and control over the corporation. Austin Powder Co. v. McCullough, 216 A.D.2d 825, 826 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep t 1995) (citing Matter of Guptill Holding Corp. v. State of New York, 33 A.D. 2d 362 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep t 1970) aff d 31 N.Y.2d 638)). 5

Exception #2: Pierce the Corporate Veil New York Liberal Pleading Standard Veil piercing is a fact-laden claim that is not well suited for resolution upon a motion to dismiss, or even a motion for summary judgment. Damianos Realty Group, LLC v. Fracchia, 35 A.D. 3d 344 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep t 2006); First Bank of Americas v. Motor Car Funding, Inc., 257 A.D.2d 287, 294 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep t 1999). A plaintiff is entitled to obtain necessary discovery to ascertain whether there are grounds to pierce the corporate veil and a complaint seeking to pierce the corporate veil should be upheld unless it is totally devoid of solid nonconclusory allegations. International Credit Brokerage Co., Inc. v. Agapov, 249 A.D.2d 77, 78 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep t 1998) (citing Sequa Corp. v. Christopher, 176 A.D.2d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep t 1991). 6

Exception #2: Pierce the Corporate Veil Florida Three Part Test (1) The shareholder dominated and controlled the corporation to such an extent that the corporation's independent existence was non-existent, and the shareholders were alter egos of the corporation; (2) The corporate form must have been used fraudulently or for an improper purpose; and (3) The fraudulent or improper use of the corporate form caused injury to the claimant. Beltran v. Vincent P. Miraglia, M.D., P.A., 125 So.3d 855, 858 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (quoting Seminole Boatyard, Inc. v. Christoph, 715 So. 2d 987, 990 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)). 7

Exception #2: Pierce the Corporate Veil Florida Improper Conduct Requirement The corporate veil will not be pierced absent a showing of improper conduct. Dania Jai-Alai Palace, Inc. v. Skyes, 450 So.2d 1114, 1121 (Fla. 1984). An example of improper conduct is when a parent establishes a subsidiary as a mere instrumentality and a sham; and the parent did so to mislead creditors and to avoid liability. Id.; Vantage View, Inc. v. Bali East Development Corp. 421 So.2d 728, 733 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). Improper conduct is a jury question. Seminole Boatyard, Inc., 715 So. 2d at 990. 8

Establishing a Corporate Form is Easy Corporate Formation Consult secretary of state website in state of incorporation File articles of organization Purpose of corporate form can be any and all lawful business Establish registered agent Obtain EIN from the IRS Operating and shareholder agreements are not filed online Pay fee Publication requirement in some states i.e., New York This can all be done in one day 9

Establishing a Corporate Form is Easy New York Corporation / LLC Publication 10

Maintaining a Corporate Form is Easy Corporate Form Maintenance File annual report Pay fees Pay state taxes 11

Exception #3: Alter Ego and Successor Liability Scenario: defunct company now appears to be operating with a new name. Old entity will not honor obligations and asserts that new entity is not responsible for the obligations. Risk factors for successor liability Suspicion: did nothing change other than the letterhead? Continuity of ownership, control, same type of business, same location, same contact information? Asset sale Ask to see documentation 12

Exception #3: Alter Ego and Successor Liability Legal Standard Generally, when one company purchases the assets of another, the purchaser does not acquire the debts of the seller, except: 1. The purchaser impliedly or explicitly agreed to assume the liability of the seller; 2. The transaction was fraudulently entered into to avoid liability; 3. The transaction amounts to a de facto merger; or 4. The purchasing company is a mere continuation of the selling company. Cargill, Inc. v. Beaver Coal & Oil Co., Inc., 424 Mass. 356, 359 (1997). 13

Exception #3: Alter Ego and Successor Liability Litigation Matters Continuity of the enterprise? Management, personnel, physical location, assets, and general business operations. Continuity of shareholders? Purchaser acquires company with shares of its own stock, and the stock becomes owned by shareholders of the seller such that sellers become a constituent part of the purchasing company. Seller promptly ceases operations, liquidates or dissolves? Purchaser assumes certain obligations of the seller that are ordinarily necessary for the uninterrupted continuation of the seller s business? Case by case basis: no single factor is necessary or sufficient to establish a de facto merger. Acushnet River & New Bedford Harbor Proceedings re Alleged PCB Pollution, 712 F. Supp. 1010, 1015 (D. Mass. 1989). 14

Summary Veil-piercing, alter ego and successor liability claims are powerful tools that create enormous litigation leverage. Amendments: if critical facts are discovered during the course of litigation, amended pleadings are generally allowed so long as the amendment would survive a motion to dismiss and the nonmoving party is not unfairly prejudiced by the delay. Rule 15 The Court should freely grant leave when justice so requires. Claims usually survive dispositive motions because they are factbased and usually contested. Courts may require disclosure of corporate records not generally tendered in litigation. Increased risk and heightened exposure can bring about a faster resolution. 15

Additional Questions / Information Contact the presenter Kenneth Chase Shook, Hardy & Bacon, LLP 1155 F Street NW, Suite 200 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 639-5606 kchase@shb.com 16

w w w. s h b. c o m 17