Skip to main content

Patrick Blanks v. Fluor Corporation

Citations

  • 450 S.W.3d 308
  • 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 1013
  • 2014 WL 4589815

How courts have described this case

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

  • explaining that “two separate corporations are regarded as wholly distinct legal entities, even if one partly or wholly owns the other”
  • holding plaintiffs made a submissible case for punitive damages in a mass tort case where plaintiffs adduced evidence “the defendants hid information from regulators[ and] resisted regulatory changes
  • explaining parent/subsidiaries are “regarded as wholly distinct legal entities, even if one partly or wholly owns the other”
  • reversing punitive damage award against one defendant as jury instructions required jury to consider undifferentiated conduct
  • requiring “complete domination . . . so that corporate entity . . . had . . . no separate mind, will or existence of its own”
  • observing, in affirming a judgment in favor of injured children and against the owner of a lead smelter, that “the most crucial and rapid time for brain growth and development is during the last trimester of pregnancy and the first five to seven years after birth”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Mooney, Richter, Odenwald

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

51 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

133 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Patrick Blanks v. Fluor Corporation

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

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.