enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Piercing the corporate veil - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercing_the_corporate_veil

    Piercing the corporate veil or lifting the corporate veil is a legal decision to treat the rights or duties of a corporation as the rights or liabilities of its shareholders. Usually a corporation is treated as a separate legal person , which is solely responsible for the debts it incurs and the sole beneficiary of the credit it is owed.

  3. Perpetual Real Estate Services, Inc. v. Michaelson Properties ...

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_Real_Estate...

    Aaron Michaelson (Aaron) formed Michaelson Properties, Inc. (Properties) in 1981 as a business to invest in real estate joint ventures. Aaron was the sole shareholder and the corporation's president. Properties entered a joint venture with Perpetual Real Estates (Perpetual), forming a partnership called "Arlington Apartment Associates" (AAA) to ...

  4. De facto corporation and corporation by estoppel - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_facto_corporation_and...

    De facto corporation and corporation by estoppel are both terms that are used by courts in most common law jurisdictions to describe circumstances in which a business organization that has failed to become a de jure corporation (a corporation by law) will nonetheless be treated as a corporation, thereby shielding shareholders from liability.

  5. Nevada corporation - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevada_corporation

    Nevada law provides extremely strong protection against piercing the corporate veil, where a corporation's owners can be held responsible for the actions of a corporation. For instance, from 1987 to 2007, there was only one case that successfully pierced the corporate veil of a Nevada corporation, and in this case the veil was pierced due to ...

  6. Corporate law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_law

    Whilst academic discussion highlights certain specific situations where courts are generally prepared to "pierce the corporate veil", to look directly at, and impose liability directly on the individuals behind the company; the actual practice of piercing the corporate veil is, at English law, non-existent. [13]

  7. Walkovszky v. Carlton - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walkovszky_v._Carlton

    Walkovszky v. Carlton, 223 N.E.2d 6 (N.Y. 1966), [1] is a United States corporate law decision on the conditions under which Courts may pierce the corporate veil. A cab company had shielded itself from liability by incorporating each cab as its own corporation. The New York Court of Appeals refused to pierce the veil on account of ...

  8. Commingling - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commingling

    Commingling is also evidence that may be used in "piercing the corporate veil" of a sham corporation, where a person shields himself from personal liability through "incorporation", yet fails to observe strict separation of corporate and personal property or accounts, among other improprieties.

  9. United States corporate law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_corporate_law

    A shareholder who reasonably expected that ownership in the corporation would entitle him or her to a job, a share of corporate earnings, a place in corporate management, or some other form of security, would oppressed in a very real sense when others in the corporation seek to defeat those expectations and there exists no effective means of ...