SSP Partners v. Gladstrong Investments (USA) Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating, in rejecting single-business enterprise doctrine, that affiliated entities that “coordinate their activities” and “pursu[e] common goals” are “commonplace” and holding that “abuse” is required to disregard the corporate separateness of two related entities
• stating, in rejecting single-business enterprise doctrine, that affiliated entities that “coordinate their activities” and “pur-su[e] common goals” are “commonplace” and holding that “abuse” is required to disregard the corporate separateness of two related entities
• noting distinction between single business enterprise and joint enterprise liability theories
• defining, in the context of a products liability suit, joint venture and enterprise in analogous terms; “the essential elements” of both “a joint venture or joint enterprise” are “an agreement, a common purpose, a community of pecuniary interest, and an equal right of control”
• such abuse consists of “fraud, evasion of existing obligations, circumvention of statutes, monopolization, criminal conduct, and the like”
• “Each example [of the six examples given in Castleberry ] involved an element ofabuseofthe corporate structure, including example (2), alter ego . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).