![]() This decision represents a significant shift in Pennsylvania law, which may increase liability for related businesses, expand the available circumstances under which Pennsylvania courts may disregard the corporate form, and reduce the liability shield offered by such structures as holding companies.Ĭorporations, limited-liability companies, and similar businesses are separate legal entities that are independent from their shareholders and owners, and prior to the Mortimer decision, the Supreme Court had been loath to expand doctrines that disregard that independent status. ![]() The Court has now issued its opinion in Mortimer, and not only did the Court adopt the enterprise theory, it indicated that it would also consider “reverse” piercing, where a corporation may be held liable for the acts of its owners. McCool, which presented the question of whether the Court would adopt the “enterprise” or “single entity” theory of the piercing-the-corporate-veil doctrine. Earlier this year, Houston Harbaugh wrote on the then-pending Pennsylvania Supreme Court case of Mortimer v.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |