Dickson Marine Inc. v. Panalpina, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that plaintiffs agency “argument fails because it cannot demonstrate that [parent] exercised control over [subsidiary]”
• evaluating sister companies under alter ego doctrine but concluding that the plaintiff had not proven sufficient control to establish an alter-ego or agency relationship
• declining to ignore corporate form and to attribute contacts of company to foreign sister entity when one was not parent of other, one does not control other, and there was no evidence of existence of agency relationship
• applying the alter ego factors to a corporate-sibling relationship “by analogy”
• subsidiary acting as “middleman” for parent’s benefit “not enough” to establish prima facie case of control
• “Invariably such clear evidence requires an additional or a ‘plus’ factor .... There must be evidence of one corporation asserting sufficient control ....”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).