No Piercing of the Veil, But Successor Liability Found

No Piercing of the Veil, But Successor Liability Found

        David Tingstad, writing on the blog of his firm Beresford Booth PLLC, has reviewed a recent decision of the Washington Court of Appeals addressing piercing the veil and successor liability, that case being Maple Valley Park Place, LLC v. Tax Resource Centers, Inc. No 78832-9-I, 2020 WL 1853575 (Wash. App. April 13, 2020). David’s review appears in a pair of posts, the first titled An Interesting Case on Piercing the Corporate Veil (Sept. 23, 2020) and Successor Liability Among Related Entities (Sept. 30, 2020). Each title is a link to the related posting.

        Very briefly, while the court did not find that the elements of piercing the veil were satisfied, and on that basis denied that relief, did find that the elements of successor liability were satisfied under both the “mere continuation” and “fraudulent purpose” theories. David provides some helpful notes as well as to the degree to which mere continuation is an uncertain legal doctrine.