× Didn't find what you were looking for? Ask a question
Top Posters
Since Sunday
g
2
2
New Topic  
deping deping
wrote...
Posts: 266
Rep: 0 0
7 years ago
In K.C. Roofing Center v. On Top Roofing, Inc, where K.C. Roofing asked the courts to hold Nugent, the owner of On Top Roofing, a corporation which no longer existed, personally liable for the cost of roofing supplies sold to On Top Roofing while it existed, the appeals court held that:
 a. Nugent was personally liable for the debts owed the plaintiffs because he was using corporate status to avoid debts to the plaintiff
  b. Nugent was not personally liable for the debts owed the plaintiffs because On Top Roofing was a limited liability company
  c. Nugent was not personally liable for the debts owed the plaintiffs because On Top Roofing no longer existed d. Nugent was personally liable for the debts owed the plaintiffs because K.C. Roofing Center was also alimited liability company
 e. Nugent was not personally liable for the debts owed the plaintiffs because the evidence did not support the three-part test for piercing the corporate veil
Read 89 times
1 Reply
Replies
Answer verified by a subject expert
derrickpate22derrickpate22
wrote...
Top Poster
Posts: 1156
Rep: 7 0
7 years ago
Sign in or Sign up in seconds to unlock everything for free
1

Related Topics

deping Author
wrote...

7 years ago
Brilliant
wrote...

Yesterday
Thanks
wrote...

2 hours ago
Smart ... Thanks!
New Topic      
Explore
Post your homework questions and get free online help from our incredible volunteers
  1197 People Browsing
Related Images
  
 361
  
 332
  
 491
Your Opinion