In Re: Dravo LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• holding the Lumax factors remain good law and can be used to determine whether the veil should be pierced

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• North Strabane Twp. v. Majestic Hills LLC, and JND Properties, LLC; Appeals of: Lakemont Gardens, LLC
  Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 2024-12-18
• In Re: Dravo LLC, Appeal of: Carmeuse Lime
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2026-05-22

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Tincher, T. v. Omega Flex, Inc., Aplt.
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2014-11-19· cited 247×
• Commonwealth v. Golden Gate Nat'l Senior Care LLC
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2018-09-25· cited 158×
• Lumax Industries, Inc. v. Aultman
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1995-12-29· cited 154×
• Nicolaou, N., h/w, Aplts. v. J. Martin M.D.
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2018-10-17· cited 134×
• Village at Camelback Property Owners Assn. Inc. v. Carr
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1988-02-16· cited 92×
• Fletcher-Harlee Corp. v. Szymanski
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2007-10-15· cited 47×
• Lomas, R. v. Kravitz, J.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2015-12-21· cited 47×
• In Re: Dravo LLC
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2023-12-19· cited 1×

Other cases named In Re: Dravo LLC

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• In Re: Dravo LLC
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2023-12-19· cited 1×