IN RE SILICONE GEL BREAST IMPLANTS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
887 F.Supp. 1447 (N.D. Ala. 1995)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This case involves an attempt by plaintiffs to pierce the veil of Medical Equipment Corp. (MEC) to get to the assets of Bristol Myers Squibb Co. (D). D loses the motion for summary judgment and the issue of piercing the veil moves on to trial. The case is interesting because it is not obvious from the facts that D dominated the activities of its subsidiary, MEC. Also, it sets out a slightly different test for piercing the veil than do other cases in the casebook.
FACTS: MEC is a wholly owned subsidiary of D. Plaintiffs were allegedly injured by silicone breast implants created by MEC and wish to pierce the corporate veil of MEC and hold D liable for the actions of its subsidiary. Evidence indicates that D had two of its employees on the board of MEC and most resolutions that were adopted by MEC's board were prepared by D's employees. MEC had to carefully report its activities regarding the implants to D. Cash and loans were freely transferred between the parent D and its subsidiary. D set wages for MEC employees and approved of new hires. Legal counsel and regular audits were shared between the two. It is key that the Bristol Myers name and logo appeared on package inserts and promotional products regarding the silicone implants.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND
DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
No comments:
Post a Comment