Firstar Bank, N.A. v. Faul Chevrolet, 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 failed to demonstrate unity of interest because it did not present evidence that the defendant corporation did not comply with corporate formalities or maintain adequate records, among other factors
• granting summary judgment because of the absence of a material fact as to unity of interest, even though the business owner used company assets to pay for his wife’s cell phone and “a place to park [his] boat”
• “[T]he evidence that the Dealership was losing money has no probative value in showing that the corporation was undercapitalized.”
• “[T]he evidence that the Dealership was losing money has no probative value in showing that the corporation was undercapitalized.”
• “[T]he evidence that the Dealership was losing money has no probative value in showing that the corporation was undercapitalized.”
• “[T]his evidence, which must exist in countless small corporations, is not suggestive of a unity of interest.” (citing Melko v. Dionisio, 219 Ill. App. 3d 1048, 1064 (2d Dist. 1991

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).