District Council No. 9 v. APC Painting, 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 the plaintiff had stated claim of piercing the corporate veil where it “allege[d] that [defendant] ha[d] used his companies in an attempt to avoid the obligations that were imposed by [certain] arbitration awards.”
• holding that the plaintiff had stated claim of piercing the corporate veil where it “allege[d] that [defendant] ha[d] used his companies in an attempt to avoid the obligations that were imposed by [certain] arbitration awards”
• “[V]eil-piercing may be available after a union establishes their right to a money judgment against the corporate entities.” (alterations and internal quotation marks omitted)
• “But whether these awards have been satisfied—a fact disputed by plaintiff—has no bearing on whether the arbitration awards should be confirmed.”
• “But whether these awards have 9|| been satisfied ... has no bearing on whether the arbitration awards should be confirmed.”
• “[A] court may confirm an arbitration award against a party even when the party has complied with that award.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).