Rolls-Royce Motor Cars, Inc. v. Schudroff

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that complaint alleged parent used its control over subsidiary to hide assets from credi tors by transferring proceeds between the two companies
• dismissing as duplicative fraud claim based on allegations that “representatives of Carriage House falsely stated ... that Carriage House was able to pay what it owed under the sales contract, and intended to do so”
• complaint listed 23 claims for relief, including common law fraud, negligent misrepresentation, conversion, breach of contract, and RICO violations
• “[Wjhere ... veil-piercing claims are not based on allegations of fraud, the liberal ‘notice pleading’ standard of Rule 8(a) applies.”
• a conversion claim will “be deemed redundant when damages are merely being sought for breach of contract”
• “Three months is not a ‘substantial period of time.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).