Doctrine of piercing the corporate veil could not be extended to the sole heir of an estate which possessed the equity interests of a corporation, where the estate administration had not yet been completed and the interests had not yet passed to the heir. Judgment reversed.
June 17, 2017 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
Breach • Unjust Enrichment • Piercing of the Corporate Veil • Subject Matter Jurisdiction over Estate Matters
Mark Hershey Farms, Inc. v. Robinson, PICS Case No. 17-0889 (Pa. Super. May 25, 2017) Dubow, J. (10 pages).
Doctrine of piercing the corporate veil could not be extended to the sole heir of an estate which possessed the equity interests of a corporation, where the estate administration had not yet been completed and the interests had not yet passed to the heir. Judgment reversed.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
Consulting Magazine recognizes leaders in technology across three categories Leadership, Client Service and Innovation.
Truly exceptional Bergen County New Jersey Law Firm is growing and seeks strong plaintiff's personal injury Attorney with 5-7 years plaintif...
Shipman is seeking an associate to join our Labor & Employment practice in our Hartford, New Haven, or Stamford office. Candidates shou...
McCarter & English, LLP, a well established and growing law firm, is actively seeking a talented and driven associate having 2-5 years o...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
