Team Central, Inc. v. Teamco, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that an erroneous discovery ruling on privilege must be “of sufficient importance to justify a reversal”
• noting that “[t]he purpose of damages is to restore an injured party to the position he enjoyed before his injury,” and that therefore “[duplicate or overlapping damages are to be avoided”
• noting that an erroneous discovery ruling on privilege must be “of sufficient importance to justify a reversal”
• establishing that \fraud” is not a necessary element of \corporate identity” liability
• finding on the conduct and relationship factor of the analysis that the plaintiffs conduct “was provoking as well as provoked”
• applying the rule that only one punitive damages award is appropriate in the context of a piercing the corporate veil case

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).