I need help ASAP. Thank you in ADVANCE. PLEASE BE SURE TO INCLUDE CORRECT AND VA

Question

I need help ASAP. Thank you in ADVANCE. PLEASE BE SURE TO INCLUDE CORRECT AND VALID ANSWERS THIS HOMEWORK IS GRADED. THANKS AGAIN.

In New York City, 2406-12 Amsterdam Associates LLC brought an action in a New York state court against Alianza Dominicana and Alianza LLC to recover unpaid rent. The plaintiff asserted cause to pierce the corporate veil, alleging that Alianza Dominicana had made promises to pay its rent while discreetly forming Alianza LLC to avoid liability for it. According to 2406-12, Alianza LLC was 90 percent owned by Alianza Dominicana, had no employees, and had no function but to hold Alianza Dominicana's assets away from its creditors. The defendants led a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs claim. (a) Assuming that 2406-12's allegations are true, are there sufficient grounds to pierce Alianza LLC's corporate veil? Discuss. (b) Suppose that the parties to this dispute were small, close corporations. How might that circumstance affect the result in this case?

Explanation / Answer

(a) The plaintiff's claims are sufficient to hold the defendants guilty under debtors and creditors law, as the sole purpose of transferring the funds to an associate company that had no employees and no business,was to move the assets away from creditors, particularly the plaintiffs. The intent of fraudulent behaviour is evident in the case.

(b) The smaller size of corporations in the case does not allow one of them to transfer the assets to the other associate company with intentions of committing fraud. Hence it does not affect the outcome of the case.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse I
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.