Skip to main content
· 12/18/2003

Hildreth v. Tidewater Equipment Co.

Citations

  • 838 A.2d 1204
  • 378 Md. 724
  • 2003 Md. LEXIS 824

How courts have described this case

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

  • noting that in Maryland, the alter-ego doctrine is applied “with great caution and reluctance”
  • finding that there is “no universal rule as to the specific criteria that courts will consider in determining whether to apply the doctrine” but noting that courts typically consider a series of factors alongside the elements of the doctrine
  • applying Maryland law without discussion to find that a shareholder of a New Jersey corporation could not be held personally liable for corporate debts
  • reviewing Bart Arconti and discussing the high bar for veil piercing in Maryland

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Wilner

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.