Malden Transp., Inc. v. Uber Techs., Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• granting motion to dismiss where “complaint does not allege facts in support of a single factor relevant to piercing the corporate veil.”
• applying same factors to attempt to pierce veil between corporation and individual defendants

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Malden Transp., Inc. v. Uber Techs., Inc.

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• Malden Transp., Inc. v. Uber Techs., Inc.
  District of Columbia· 2019-07-03· cited 2×
• Malden Transp., Inc. v. Uber Techs., Inc.
  District of Columbia· 2018-06-18· cited 1×