John R. Stoebner, Trustee v. Thomas A. Lingenfelter, Doing Business as Heritage Collectors' Society

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a court can disregard the corporate entity when the shareholder “owned all, or substantially all, of the stock, treated the property as his own, and, most importantly, [when] no shareholder or creditor would be adversely affected.”
• recognizing reverse piercing when other shareholders and creditors are not adversely affected
• affirming a jury verdict finding that Lingenfelter had received fraudulent transfers from T.G. Morgan in violation of 11 U.S.C. §§ 544 and 548
• “Whether to pierce the corporate veil is a legal determination that, in our circuit, is governed by state law.”
• in assessing whether a corporate veil should be pierced, a court should analyze whether the corporation functioned as the mere instrumentality of the entities that a party is attempting to reach by piercing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).