This page looks plain and unstyled because you're using a non-standard compliant browser. To see it in its best form, please upgrade to a browser that supports web standards. It's free and painless.
Jan Novak, Associate Director jan.novak@law.csuohio.edu | October 01, 2008 - 08:35
Piercing
the corporate veil in Ohio just got a little bit harder: In Dombroski v. WellPoint, Inc., Slip Opinion No.
2008-Ohio-4827 the Ohio Supreme Court
yesterday modified the three pronged test announced in 1993’s Belvedere
Condominium Unit Owners’ Assn. v. R.E. Roark Cos. Inc , 67 Ohio St 3d 274, 617
NE2d 1075. The Belvedere court’s second
prong had permitted actions against individual shareholders when their control
of the corporation was exercised in such a way as to commit “fraud or an
illegal act” against the plaintiff. Subsequent
appellate decisions had broadened the definition of that phrase to include “other
unjust or inequitable acts.” The Court found that such an expansion ran
contrary to the concept of limited shareholder liability, yet recognized that misuses
of the corporate form other than fraud or illegal acts should not be protected:
“Accordingly,
we hold that to fulfill the second prong of the Belvedere test for
piercing the corporate veil, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant
shareholder exercised control over the corporation in such a manner as to
commit fraud, an illegal act, or a similarly unlawful act. Courts should apply
this limited expansion cautiously toward the goal of piercing the corporate
veil only in instances of extreme shareholder misconduct.”
Read
the Court’s summary here.
| « | October 2008 | » | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Su | Mo | Tu | We | Th | Fr | Sa |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | |