Rosener v. Majestic Management, Inc. (In Re OODC, LLC)

How courts have described this case

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

• holding similarly vis-á-vis successor liability and alter-ego claims under Delaware law
• finding that a trustee adequately alleged aiding and abetting because defendants were “aware of these activities and participated in them by extending loans to the Debtor to facilitate the actions of Carter and Large”
• stating that an aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary duty claim requires proof of (1) wrongful conduct on the part of the fiduciary; (2) the defendant had knowledge of the fiduciary’s wrongful conduct; and (3
• noting fact that LBO “clearly was not a transaction in the ordinary course” of debtor’s business may be indicative of fraud
• finding that the plaintiff alleged sufficient facts of fraud and aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary duty and concluding that, if proven, those claims would provide a basis for a finding of egregious conduct which would warrant equitable subordination of claims
• requiring allegations of knowledge of the fiduciary’s wrongful conduct and “substantial assistance or encouragement”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).