« Ind. Gov't. - "New Albany anti-discrimination law draws raves from Kentucky" | Main | Ind. Gov't. - Hancock County coroner steps down from office after pleading guilty in drunken-driving case; Lake County federal trial »
Thursday, August 23, 2012
Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 1 today (and 3 NFP)
For publication opinions today (1):
In Konrad Motor and Welder Service, Inc., Konrad Lambrecht, and Sharon Lambrecht v. Magnetech Industrial Services, Inc., a 16-page, 2-1 opinion, Judge Vaidik writes:
Konrad Motor & Welder Service, Inc. (“Konrad MWS”), Konrad Lambrecht, and Sharon Lambrecht appeal the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Magnetech Industrial Services, Inc. Konrad MWS and the Lambrechts argue that there is a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether the corporate veil of Konrad Electric, Inc., a previous corporation, should be pierced in order to hold the Lambrechts individually liable for Konrad Electric’s debts and whether Konrad MWS is the alter ego of Konrad Electric.NFP civil opinions today (2):
We conclude that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of Magnetech and piercing Konrad Electric’s corporate veil because there are genuine issues of material fact such that this determination should not have been made on summary judgment. However, we conclude that the trial court properly granted summary judgment in favor of Magnetech as to the second issue because Konrad MWS is the alter ego of Konrad Electric.
We therefore affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand. * * *
BRADFORD, J., concurs.
CRONE, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with separate opinion. [that begins, at p. 15] I agree with the majority that the only reasonable inference that may be drawn from the undisputed designated evidence is that Konrad MWS is the alter ego of Konrad Electric. I also believe that the only reasonable inference that may be drawn from the undisputed designated evidence is that Konrad Electric was “merely a sham corporation in existence to allow the Lambrechts to escape liability” and that the trial court properly pierced the corporate veil. Slip op. at 10. Therefore, I respectfully dissent as to that issue.
NFP criminal opinions today (1):
Posted by Marcia Oddi on August 23, 2012 11:16 AM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions