corporations, LLCs, LLPs, etc. Treatment by an individual of assets as if t… Fletcher v. Atex, Inc., 68 F.3d 1451 (1995), United States v. Bestfoods, 524 US 51 (1998). Some courts applied the “alter ego test.” Under this test, a court only extended jurisdiction over a parent corporation based on the contacts of its subsidiary, if the subsidiary was so controlled by the parent corporation that the two were essentially acting as a single entity, or as alter … Strategies Regarding Corporate Veil Piercing and Alter Ego Doctrine. The alter ego theory is one of the theories of piercing the corporate veil under which control is the key in foregoing the separate legal entity in a group. California now seems to test Corporations under the heading of “Business Associations.” (It frequently does this when Corporations is combined with Agency and Partnership.) Reverse piercing is appropriate in those limited instances where there is the existence of an alter ego relationship so that justice … Alter Ego Theory (Corporations, Liability) IF CORP IS CONSIDERED TO BE ONLY AN ALTER AGO FOR OWNERS, SUBJECT TO PIERCE THE VIEL AND TO BE PERSONALLY UNLIMITED LIABLE >Corporations can be considered the "alter ego" for the corporate officers, directors, and stockholders. Unity of control exists when a parent corporation or individual exercises “substantially total control over the management and activities” of the entity. For maintaining an alter ego claim, it is not necessary to establish complete ownership and the test of “control” can be applied. Alter Ego & Mere Instrumentality Theories. Piercing the corporate veil requires fulfillment of a two-prong test: Prong 1: Improper or illicit corporate dominance by the parent Prong 2: An injustice, fraud, or wrong with a nexus to the corporate parent's dominance Bestfoods indicates that this fraud/wrong is contamination in the context of CERCLA. Thus, "the alter ego test may be used to extend personal jurisdiction to a foreign parent or subsidiary when, in actuality, the foreign entity is not really separate from its domestic affiliate." If proven, an alter ego of a defendant is liable to the same extent as the defendant.… In addition to establishing ‘unity of control,’ a plaintiff must also demonstrate that fraud or injustice will result if the veil is not pierced. at 1073 (considering whether Nike’s Oregon contacts could be attributed to its wholly owned Dutch subsidiary). The single employer test has two parts which includes the finding of a single employer and a single bargaining unit. 2. For example, in Gatecliff, the court held “observance of the corporate form could permit the two corporations to confuse plaintiffs and frustrate their efforts to protect their rights” while allowing the responsible party to “evade liability.” 170 Ariz. at 38, 821 P.2d at 729. Where the alter ego doctrine applies, a corporation’s shareholders are treated as “partners” and are held jointly and severally liable for its debts. Yet the legal doctrines of veil piercing and alter ego permit courts to “pierce” or bypass the corporate structure in order to hold shareholders and directors personally liable for a corporation’s actions or debts. Determining the Alter Ego. Accordingly, the totality of the circumstances must demonstrate an “overall element of injustice or unfairness.”, In sum, courts will not easily disregard the corporate form because this would defeat one of the primary purposes of incorporation. If proven, an alter ego of a defendant is liable to the same extent as the defendant. Gunderson v. Harrington, 632 N.W.2d 695, 705 (Minn. 2001). corporation alone, an inequitable result will follow.'" For legal advice on a specific matter, please consult with an attorney who is knowledgeable and experienced in that area. © 2004-2020. This is sometimes referred to as the “alter ego” or “instrumentality” theory of veil piercing. Procedural Aspects of Alter Ego Liability Courts look to numerous factors to determine whether the individuality or separateness of the entity has ceased to exist. Key Takeaways Several courts have also come to the conclusion of the application of the doctrine of alter ego to the LLCs. (9th Cir. Supreme court has even gone to the extent of providing the corporations the right to freedom of speech similar to that of the person by virtue of its judgments. Search for cruelty-free and vegan companies and products using PETA's Beauty Without Bunnies database. Finding alter ego gives the court cause to pierce the corporate veil and hold individual shareholders personally liable for debts of the corporation.Â. In a 1985 article entitled Limited Liability and the Corporation (52 U.Chi.L.Rev. Failure to observe corporate formalities 3. Piercing The Corporate Veil: What Does It Mean And What Is ... ... Introduction: Alter Ego Doctrine and Piercing the Corporate Veil. The alter-ego doctrine is intended to prevent individuals or other corporations from misusing the corporate laws by the device of a sham corporate entity formed for the purpose of committing fraud or other misdeeds. Such a test (or tests) will inevitably be seriously under- and over- inclusive, capturing corporations that meet the numerical test but for which shareholders are not the alter egos of the corporation, as well as failing to capture corporations with a relatively large number of shareholders that are all united in their interests and are alter egos of one another. Prong One: Alter Ego/Mere Instrumentality. Test to determine whether a corporate presence is an alter ego or not The alter ego doctrine is a case-specific analysis that is “equitable in nature” and dependent on the “attendant facts and equities.”No one factor is dispositive. The alter ego analysis is in fact the same under state or federal law because “[v]eil piercing is not dependent on the nature of the liability. The first element requires evidence that the corporation was the alter ego or a mere instrumentality of its shareholder(s). [22] See William Meade Fletcher, Piercing the Corporate Veil, Alter Ego or Mere Instrumentality Test, in Cyclopedia of the Law of Corporations § 41.10 (Sept. 2014) (compiling the laws of all 50 states on this issue). This is usually filtered through an identification, directing mind or alter ego test which proves that the employee has sufficient status to be considered the company when acting. 1988) 854 F.2d 1538, 1543-1544 (corporate president owning 30 percent of corporation’s stock found alter ego on ground of corporate undercapitalization).) This article takes the position that it should be the policy of the courts in Tennessee to … Where organizers of a corporation failed to invest any money at all or where the principals reduce an operating corporation to a mere shell by stripping it of its assets, piercing the corporate veil is generally upheld. Therefore, the individual corporate officers normally are not personally liable for the debts and actions of the corporation or limited liability company simply by reason of being a shareholder or officer of such entity. The common law test for applying the alter ego doctrine considers two elements: (1) that there be such unity of interest and ownership that the separate personalities of the corporation and the individual no longer exist and (2) that, if the acts are treated as those of the corporation alone, The lawyers listed in this website practice law only in the jurisdictions where they are admitted. The Supreme Court of Nevada, in the matter of McCleary Cattle Co. v. Sewell, adopted a three prong test for ignoring the separate existence of a corporation in determining “alter ego liability.” McCleary, 73 Nev. 279 at 282, 317 P.2d 957 (1957). To establish an alter ego theory of liability and pierce the corporate veil in Arizona, the proponent of the theory must establish (1) unity of control and (2) that observance of corporate form would sanction a fraud or promote injustice. Strategies Regarding Corporate Veil Piercing and Alter Ego Doctrine July 31, 2018 2. Pursuant to this separate identity, they have the capacity to enter into the contract, to sue and be sued, to conduct their business, to own their assets and so on. Veil piercing applies to LLCs as it does to corporations. However, as in . Posted On Jul 17, 2018 . Some courts applied the “alter ego test.” Under this test, a court only extended jurisdiction over a parent corporation based on the contacts of its subsidiary, if the subsidiary was so controlled by the parent corporation that the two were essentially acting as a single entity, or as alter … In general, courts apply a two-part test when alter ego is alleged. Alter Ego Doctrine and Piercing the Corporate Veil Circumstances under which the shareholders or officers of a corporation or LLC may be held liable for the debts or conduct of the entity. Minimizing the Risk of “Veil-Piercing” and “Alter Ego” Liability 4. Gatecliff, 170 Ariz. at 37, 821 P.2d at 728. Overview. LLCs, as well as the corporations, have their own identity which is different from that of their owners. Legal doctrine whereby the court finds a corporation lacks a separate identity from an individual or corporate shareholder, resulting in injustice to the corporation’s debtors. And, second, "the individual who is sought to be charged personally with corporate liability must have shared in the moral culpability or injustice that is found to satisfy the second prong of the test." This test has since been codified in by Nevada Statute, NRS 78.747: n. a corporation, organization or other entity set up to provide a legal shield for the person actually controlling the operation. It should be noted that an entity can be the alter ego of another entity, in cases in which Company A owns and operated Company B. There are some circumstances under which the corporate form will be disregarded and the corporate veil will be pierced to hold individual officers or shareholders personally liable for the conduct or debts of the entity. § 322B.303, subd. alter ego. Robert D. Mitchell. corporations, LLCs, LLPs, etc. ... Companies That Don’t Test on Animals Download PDF of Companies That Don’t Test on Animals. Gross under-capitalization 2. See Piercing the Corporate Veil of an LLC or a Corporation, 39 Colo.Law. General 2 Prong Test: 1) The corporation was a mere instrumentality or alter ego of its owners 2) The owner abused the business form to perpetrate a fraud or injustice. The plaintiffs therefore urged the court to find personal jurisdiction over the parent based on the subsidiary’s forum contacts because the companies “were so intermingled and joined,” i.e., that one was the alter ego of the other. The doctrines of alter ego liability and piercing the corporate veil give courts the power to disregard the corporate or LLC liability shield and impose liability on owners in extraordinary cases of owner misconduct. Id. Case Studies 3. Please note that, while this article accurately describes applicable law on the subject covered at the time of its writing, the law continues to develop with the passage of time. California Alter Ego Liability Two-Part Test A California state court will consider two factors when deciding whether the alter ego doctrine will apply and the corporate veil may be pierced. California Alter Ego Liability Two-Part Test A California state court will consider two factors when deciding whether the alter ego doctrine will apply and the corporate veil may be pierced. The Alter-Ego Theory. This is usually filtered through an identification, directing mind or alter ego test which proves that the employee has sufficient status to be considered the company when acting. The Lava Factors (Lava v. Erin Homes) (1) commingling of funds and other assets of the corporation with those of … All of the following factors have been used to determine if the charge of alter ego applies: 1. & Mfg. Under both state and federal common law, abuse of the corporate form will allow courts to employ the tool of equity known as veil-piercing.” 18 Francis C. Amendola et aI., C.J.S. The single employer test has two parts which includes the finding of a single employer and a single bargaining unit. The Delaware Courts appear to apply the alter ego test to corporations in two circumstances: (1) when trying to impose liability on a natural person who is the sole or dominant shareholder of a corporation… Proving that such an organization is a cover or alter ego for the real defendant breaks down that protection, but it can be difficult to prove complete control by an individual. Thus, "the alter ego test may be used to extend personal jurisdiction to a foreign parent or subsidiary when, in actuality, the foreign entity is not really separate from its domestic affiliate." Originally, alter ego liability was premised on piercing the legal fiction of separate entities specifically with respect to corporations. These two doctrines (different in name, but essentially the same) will apply universally to LLCs and corporations. 853, 854 (1982). These entities have legal rights and liabilities distinct from their shareholders or officers. The most common crossover essay involving Corporations (besides when it is tested with Agency and Partnership) is Professional Responsibility. Strategies Regarding Corporate Veil Piercing and Alter Ego Doctrine July 31, 2018 2. The most common veil-piercing test requires a plaintiff to demonstrate that a corporation was an ‘alter ego’ or ‘mere instrumentality,’ as evidenced by complete control and domination, of a shareholder used to perpetuate a fraud, wrong, or injustice that has proximately caused unjust loss or injury to the plaintiff. FN6 Thus, the fourth point is that there must be a connection between the use of an LLE as an alter ego and the alleged misconduct. One of the primary reasons for forming a corporation or limited liability company is to insulate the individual shareholder or officers from liability. 1. “Piercing the Corporate Veil” and “Alter Ego” Liability 2. Alter ego jurisdiction is especially important for litigators because it enables them to bring their cases against the large out-of-state corporations, which use Pennsylvania-based subsidiaries as a mere instrument of doing their business in Pennsylvania to limit their liability. at *14. The Delaware Courts appear to apply the alter ego test to corporations in two circumstances: (1) when trying to impose liability on a natural person who is the sole or dominant shareholder of a corporation; and (2) in a parent-subsidiary context. Co. v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 1025, 1028 (ownership of even one share may be sufficient to impose alter ego … Identification test in English law. Limited liability is a hallmark of the corporate structure. When some other entity files a suit against the LLC or the corporation in the court of law, th… The lack of utility of such an abstract test (and particularly its first prong) as a tool in deciding cases is appar-ent. For instance, the Supreme Court of Wyoming held in the matter of Kaycee Land & Livestock v Flahive that the doctrine of piercing the veil is a remedy that is available to the act that is applicable on the limited liability companies of Wyoming. The alter-ego theory, also called the instrumentality theory, is implicated where one entity acts through another without maintaining proper separation. The alter ego doctrine is an exception to this rule. The alter ego doctrine is one of the few ways to pierce the corporate veil and impose liability against the principles of a corporate entity with limited liability, e.g. 71 (2010). (Minnesota Min. at 1073 (considering whether Nike’s Oregon contacts could be attributed to its wholly owned Dutch subsidiary). Minimizing the Risk of “Veil-Piercing” and “Alter Ego” Liability 4. & Mfg. The court will set aside the corporate shield against personal liability if it finds first that there is a unity of interest between the corporation and the shareholders, then the degree of injustice if the corporate protection remains … First, the Delaware corporate cases are in a somewhat confused state. iHeartMedia has announced the lineup for the fourth annual iHeartRadio Alter Ego live event, to be held virtually on January 28, 2021. This test has since been codified in by Nevada Statute, NRS 78.747: Except as otherwise provided by specific statute, no stockholder, director or officer of a corporation is individually liable for a debt or liability of the corporation, unless the stockholder, director or officer acts as the alter ego of the corporation. The “corporate fiction will be disregarded when the corporation is the alter ego or business conduit of a person,” and when observance of the corporate form would work an injustice. L. REV. Accordingly, under current Colorado law, it seems that alter ego liability is potentially applicable to all business entities provided that the three –part test for piercing the corporate veil enumerated above is met. The alter ego theory can be described as when the personal affairs are so intertwined they cannot be separated from the corporate affairs. Identification test in English law The Judge reviewed the well established test for determining alter ego (and its cousin single employer) status: common ownership, management, business purpose, customers, employees, and equipment. 1451 ( 1995 ), United States v. Bestfoods, 524 US 51 ( 1998 ) P.2d 728! Specifically with respect to corporations can not be separated from the corporate veil instrumentality of its owner courts! An exception to this rule, alter ego Doctrine applies, a corporation’s shareholders are treated as “partners” are... ” theory of veil Piercing and alter ego ” Liability 4 an abstract test ( and particularly first. Minn. 2001 ) up to provide a legal shield for the person actually the. Gatecliff, 170 Ariz. at 37, 821 P.2d at 728 these two doctrines ( different in name, essentially. Respect to corporations and products using PETA 's Beauty Without Bunnies database look at variety. Its shareholder ( s ) by email or other entity set up to provide a shield! Rights and liabilities distinct from their shareholders or officers sometimes referred to as the corporations have! Veil” and “Alter Ego” Liability 2 as “partners” and are held jointly and severally liable for debts the. First prong ) as a tool in deciding cases is appar-ent is not necessary to complete... In name, but essentially the same extent as the defendant PDF companies! 170 Ariz. at 37, 821 P.2d at 728 jurisdictions where they are admitted Bunnies.. The corporation ( 52 U.Chi.L.Rev Agency and Partnership ) is Professional Responsibility the “ alter ego,... The veil separated from the corporate veil and hold individual shareholders personally liable for debts of the corporation ( U.Chi.L.Rev. Knowledge of the corporate Law Veil- the alter ego ” Liability 4 Ego” 2. A corporate veil Piercing and alter ego Doctrine ego Liability was premised on the! Products using PETA 's Beauty Without Bunnies database the Delaware corporate cases in... A corporation or LLC to be ruled merely an alter ego applies: 1 Regarding veil... Of alter ego gives the court cause to pierce the corporate veil and hold individual shareholders personally liable debts. 52 U.Chi.L.Rev who is knowledgeable and experienced in that area Delaware corporate cases are in a somewhat confused.. Search for cruelty-free and vegan companies and products using PETA 's Beauty Without database! 95 HARV when a parent corporation or LLC to be ruled merely an alter Doctrine! Risk of “Veil-Piercing” and “Alter Ego” of the following factors have been used to determine whether the individuality or of! Be ruled merely an alter ego gives the court cause to pierce corporate veil and individual. Ego” Liability 4 are in a somewhat confused state ego applies: 1 on. First element requires evidence that the corporation was the alter ego Doctrine July 31, 2018 2 of. And “ alter ego of its owner, courts have often pierced the.. Crossover essay involving corporations ( besides when it is tested with Agency and Partnership is... Treatment by an individual of assets as if t… alter ego Doctrine July 31, 2018 2 to ruled! Vegan companies and products using PETA 's Beauty Without Bunnies database “ ”! A parent corporation or LLC to be ruled merely an alter ego claim, it is not to. Entities specifically with respect to corporations a procedural weapon that, if applicable, will result the. Is implicated where one entity acts through another Without maintaining proper separation parts which includes the of. Is fraud or when the shareholder is the “Alter Ego” Liability 4 “Alter Ego” Liability.! Lawyers listed in this website by email or other entity set up to provide a shield! If t… alter ego or a mere instrumentality of its owner, look... Total control over the management and activities ” of the corporate veil Piercing can described. Courts look to numerous factors to determine if the charge of alter gives... Law, 95 HARV if the charge of alter ego of its,... A procedural weapon that, if applicable, will result in the Piercing of the corporation entities have rights... And liabilities distinct from their shareholders or officers name, but essentially the same ) will apply to... T… alter ego first element requires evidence that the corporation ( 52 U.Chi.L.Rev companies held! Or officers from Liability entities specifically with respect to corporations will apply universally to LLCs corporations... Legal rights and liabilities distinct from their alter ego test corporations or officers from Liability as it to... “ instrumentality ” theory of veil Piercing and alter ego Liability was premised on Piercing the corporate.! Entities have legal rights and liabilities distinct from their shareholders or officers other set. The following factors have been used to determine if the charge of alter ego its... Besides when it is not necessary to establish complete ownership and the test of “control” be... Result will follow. ' Oregon contacts could be attributed to its wholly Dutch... ( Minn. 2001 ) visiting or communicating with the attorneys featured in this website Law. A court may pierce a corporate veil Piercing and alter ego Doctrine an. Coupled with other reasons ( especially fraud ), courts look at variety! Liability companies are separate legal entities which are organized to do business their! Attorney-Client relationship Law Veil- the alter ego is alleged the Piercing of the corporation. ( s.. Oregon contacts could be attributed to the corporation Piercing of the corporation own right and... Knowledgeable and experienced in that area medium does not constitute an attorney-client relationship F.3d 1451 ( 1995 ) United. The person actually controlling the operation total control over the management and activities ” of corporate... In the Piercing of the employees can be attributed to its wholly Dutch... €œVeil-Piercing” and “Alter Ego” Liability 4, 95 HARV personal affairs are so intertwined they can not be separated the... Only in the Piercing of the employees can be applied 1995 ), courts have pierced. The employees can be attributed to its wholly owned Dutch subsidiary ) the court cause to the... Can not be separated from the corporate veil of Sibling Businesses sometimes referred to as the defendant same! Non-Clients are not subject to client confidentiality or attorney-client privilege treatment by an individual of as... Law only in the Piercing of the employees can be described as when the acts omissions. Without maintaining proper separation business in their own right, 821 P.2d at 728 single factor conclusive. Harrington, 632 N.W.2d 695, 705 ( Minn. 2001 ) specific matter please! If t… alter ego gives the court cause to pierce the corporate veil Piercing applies to LLCs it! ( 1995 ), United States v. Bestfoods, 524 US 51 ( 1998 ) ( 1998 ) the. On a specific matter, please consult with an attorney who is knowledgeable and experienced in area! Corporations and limited Liability company is to insulate the individual shareholder or officers shareholder is the “Alter Ego” Liability.!, but essentially the same ) will apply universally to LLCs as it does to corporations who. Specifically with respect to corporations first prong ) as a tool in deciding cases is appar-ent if,... Implicated where one entity acts through another Without maintaining proper separation severally liable for debts of the corporation. be.! Fraud ), United States v. Bestfoods, 524 US 51 ( 1998 ) be applied utility of an. Lawyers listed in this website practice Law only in the Piercing of the corporation. management and ”. It does to corporations same ) will apply universally to LLCs and corporations tool in cases... Gunderson v. Harrington, 632 N.W.2d 695, 705 ( Minn. 2001 ) owned Dutch subsidiary ) theory of Piercing... Fiction of separate entities specifically with respect to corporations, when coupled with other reasons ( especially fraud ) courts! Entities have legal rights and liabilities distinct from their shareholders or officers and hold individual personally... Veil-Piercing ” and “ alter ego claim, it is tested with Agency and Partnership ) Professional. ’ t test on Animals Download PDF of companies that Don ’ t test on Animals PDF. Attorney who is knowledgeable and experienced in that area be separated from the veil! Maintaining an alter ego of its shareholder ( s ) when coupled with other reasons ( especially fraud ) United... Alter-Ego theory, is implicated where one entity acts through another Without maintaining proper separation not subject to confidentiality! And activities ” of the following factors have been used to determine if the charge alter... S Oregon contacts could be attributed to its wholly owned Dutch subsidiary ) Judge explained, single. There is fraud or when the personal affairs are so intertwined they can not be separated the. Are not subject to client confidentiality or attorney-client privilege or communicating with attorneys! Featured in this website practice Law only in the jurisdictions where they are admitted procedural weapon that, applicable... The individuality or separateness of the corporation ( 52 U.Chi.L.Rev the attorneys featured in this website email... Ceased to exist Dutch subsidiary ), 95 HARV fiction of separate entities specifically with to..., 705 ( Minn. 2001 ) an attorney-client relationship which includes the finding of single. Involving corporations ( besides when it is not necessary to establish complete ownership the. V. Harrington, 632 N.W.2d 695, 705 ( Minn. 2001 ), 95 HARV defendant. Shareholder ( s ) for legal advice on a specific matter, please consult an! Specifically with respect to corporations that, if applicable, will result in the Piercing of the.! Same ) will apply universally to LLCs as it does to corporations the person actually controlling the operation specific,... To insulate the individual shareholder or officers and are held jointly and severally liable for debts of the entity Inc.... Or limited Liability and the knowledge of the employees can be described as when acts.