Ronald Alman, Etc. v. Jerome Danin

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that sole shareholders as officers of the corporation necessarily controlled prior litigation
• allowing veil piercing because owners undercapitalized subsidiary and dealt in bad faith with unions
• allowing corporate veil to be pierced to reach individual owners’ assets to enforce a pension plan that unfunded, shell corporation fraudulently negotiated
• finding “no litmus test in the federal courts governing when to disregard corporate form” in an “alter ego” case, but attempting to establish factors considered under federal law
• allowing veil piercing because owners undercapitalized subsidiary and dealt in bad faith with unions
• allowing plaintiffs to enforce judgment against officer shareholders, noting that the Employment Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) implicitly allowed the corporate form to be disregarded and officer shareholders to be held liable for a judgment against the corporation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).