Flower v. Préjean

How courts have described this case

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

• finding no evidence “demonstrating . . . the business strategies and financial statements of [the subsidiaries] were consolidated so that the subsidiaries could operate as one.”
• finding the plaintiff failed to present the contacts required to establish general personal jurisdiction over a foreign subsidiary where any such contacts did not render the subsidiary “at home” in Delaware
• “When reviewing a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2
• “To state a veil-piercing claim under Delaware law, a plaintiff must plead facts supporting an inference that the corporation, through its alter ego, has created a sham entity designed to defraud investors or creditors.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).