Legal Opinion · Dissent

Humana, Inc. v. Kissun

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided July 12, 1996No. A95A2781Published

1DissentPope, Presiding Judge

I respectfully dissent. The trial court correctly denied summary judgment since the plaintiffs presented sufficient evidence to create a jury issue as to whether the corporate veil was pierced.

“Using terminology such as ‘piercing the corporate veil,’ ‘looking at the substance rather than at the form,’ or ‘disregarding the corporate fiction,’ our courts have disregarded the separate entity of a corporation where it has overextended its privileges. [Cit.] To activate this cut-through, there must be abuse of the corporate form. ‘Sole ownership of a corporation by one person or another…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Derbyshire v. United Builders Supplies, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1990
  2. SunAmerica Financial, Inc. v. 260 Peachtree Street, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1991
  3. Condenser Service & Engineering Co. v. Brunswick Port AuthorityCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1953
  4. Mark Six Realty Associates, Inc. v. DrakeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1995
  5. Boafo v. Hospital Corp. of AmericaCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1985

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API