4 Factors for Piercing the Corporate Veil to Collect on a Judgment

//4 Factors for Piercing the Corporate Veil to Collect on a Judgment

4 Factors for Piercing the Corporate Veil to Collect on a Judgment

Veil piercing is a legal tactic that creditors use when a company’s shield of limited liability is abused. Normally, a corporation protects its owners from personal liability. But when that protection is misused, courts can break through this corporate barrier. They hold the owners personally accountable for business debts.

Below are four key factors that often lead to veil piercing. Creditors can use them for an efficient court judgment collection process.

1. Commingling of Personal and Corporate Assets

Commingling assets is referred to the case when business owners treat the company’s money like it’s their own. They mix personal and corporate funds with one another. This blurs the line between the individual and the business.

Imagine a business owner using the company’s funds to pay for personal expenses like a vacation, a luxury shopping spree, or even a mortgage payment. It will be then the signal that this business is not a separate legal entity from its owners.

Take the case of Walkovsky v. Carlton (1966). The owner ran multiple taxi companies but treated their funds as if they were all one. He dipped into company accounts to cover personal expenses and kept the businesses underfunded on purpose. When a car accident victim tried to collect damages, they found each company had just enough to cover its own basic needs. The court saw this as an illegitimate way of business operation. It then pierced the veil and held the owner personally liable for debts to be paid.

For creditors, commingling is like finding the crack in the armor. If there’s evidence that personal and corporate funds are mixed, it shows the owner doesn’t respect the business as separate. It then becomes the key to arguing that the company’s debts are really the owner’s responsibility. You will then find it easy to get the court judgment collection.

2. Undercapitalization of the Business

Undercapitalization is like setting up a business with no safety net. This means that the company doesn’t have enough funds to cover its expected debts or liabilities. It’s a sign that the owners never intended to operate a viable business. Instead, they just wanted a legal shell to hide behind.

Suppose a construction company took huge projects with minimal financial resources. When creditors come knocking for payment, they discover the company’s bank account is nearly empty. This is exactly what happened in the case of Sea-Land Services, Inc. v. Pepper Source (1991). The business was undercapitalized from the start. The owner juggled money between companies, keeping each just barely afloat. The court saw through this setup and pierced the veil. It then allowed the creditors to settle the debt through the owner’s personal assets.

Undercapitalization is a big red flag for creditors. It’s like the company was set up to fail on purpose. If you can show that the business doesn’t have the funds that it should have had, then it’s clear evidence that the owners are using the corporate shield as a sham.

3. Failure to Observe Corporate Formalities

Corporate formalities are essential to keeping a business separate from its owners. These formalities include holding regular meetings, keeping proper minutes, issuing stock, and following bylaws. When a company skips these steps, it signals that the business isn’t truly independent. It’s more of a personal project than a legitimate company.

A great example of this case is the case of Kinney Shoe Corp. v. Polan (1991). The owner didn’t bother with any corporate formalities. There was no sign of any board meetings, minutes, or stock certificates. In this case, the court decided that the business was merely the owner’s alter ego. It then simply led to piercing the corporate veil.

For creditors, failure to follow corporate formalities is proof that the company isn’t really separate from its owners. If you find evidence of missing paperwork or unobserved formalities, then it is the opportunity to press for court judgment collection.

4. Fraudulent or Improper Conduct

Business fraud means any unethical behavior that cheats the creditors. Such behavior can include hiding assets, misrepresenting the company’s financial health, or using the corporation to avoid legal responsibilities. When fraud is at play, courts are quick to see through the corporate veil.

One notable case is Morris v. Department of Taxation and Finance of New York (1995). The business owner created a web of shell companies to dodge taxes and hide assets from creditors. The companies were set up not as real businesses but as mere tools of deception. In the end, the court held the owner liable for both the unpaid taxes and debts to creditors.

For creditors, fraudulent conduct is the strongest card in their deck. By showing that the company engaged in fraud, you can argue that the owners should not be protected by limited liability.

Conclusion

Veil piercing is a powerful legal remedy for creditors dealing with evasive corporate debtors. With the right evidence, you can convince the court to set aside all corporate protections for the business. If you are looking for a company that can help you with court judgment collection, then you should contact us. Our experts will help you settle the debt and even buy your outstanding judgments.

By |2024-09-25T05:07:38+00:00September 25th, 2024|Blog|0 Comments

About the Author:

Leave A Comment