AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

AETNA ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTING CO., APPELLANT, v. HOMESTEAD ELECTRIC, LTD., DEFENDANT, ROBERT F. LUTZ, RESPONDENT.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff contends that the corporate veil of Homestead Electric, Ltd., should be pierced and that its sole shareholder, Robert F. Lutz, should be held liable for its debts. However, to pierce the corporate veil, the plaintiff must show that the owner exercised complete domination of the corporation with respect to the transaction attacked, and that such domination was used to commit a fraud or wrong against the plaintiff which resulted in the plaintiff's injury (see, Matter of Morris v. New York State Dept. of Taxation and Fin., 82 N.Y.2d 135; Hyland Meat Co. v. Tsagarakis, 202 A.D.2d 552).

Here, the plaintiff failed to produce any evidence showing that Lutz used his alleged domination of Homestead Electric, Ltd., to commit a fraud or wrong against it. Thus, Lutz was entitled to summary judgment (see, TNS Holdings v. MKI Sec. Corp., 92 N.Y.2d 335; Hyland Meat Co. v. Tsagarakis, supra).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

AETNA ELECT. DIST. v. HOMESTEAD ELECTRIC
(Jan 25, 2001)