Skip to main content
· 5/2/2001

In Re Sunstates Corp. Shareholder Litigation

Citations

  • 788 A.2d 530
  • 2001 Del. Ch. LEXIS 63
  • 2001 WL 491173

How courts have described this case

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

  • noting that “to pierce the corporate veil based on an agency or ‘alter ego’ theory, ‘the corporation must be a sham and exist for no other purpose than as a vehicle for fraud’” (quoting Wallace, 752 A.2d at 1184)
  • finding “no basis” to pierce the corporate veil where “entities [were] engaged in substantial business operations”
  • declining to apply implied covenant in context of preferred stock agreement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lamb

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.