Piercing Is A Remedy

Piercing Is A Remedy

      In a recent decision from the Bankruptcy Court, the rule was again stated that piercing is a remedy. In re Bullitt Utilities, Inc. (Keats v. Cogan), Case No. 15-34000(1)(7), AP No. 17-3070, 2020 WL 214761 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. Jan. 10, 2020).

      This decision was handed down in the context of giving summary judgment to an individual named in the adversary proceeding. In one of those counts, the trustee sought to pierce the veil of a corporation in order to hold the defendant, alleging that he was a director of the corporation, liable under a theory of piercing the veil. Rejecting that theory, the court noted that “that piercing” is an equitable remedy, not a separate cause of action. In support thereof, it cited both Howland v. Beads and Steeds Inns, LLC (In re Howland), 516 B.R. 163, 167 (Bankr. E.D. Ky. 2014) and Daniels v. CDB Bell, LLC, 300 S.W.3d 204, 211 (Ky. App. 2009).