Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Axtmann v. Chillemi

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided November 14, 2007No. 20070006Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCrothers, Justice

[¶ 27] I concur with that part of the majority opinion reversing the district court’s judgment imposing successor liability on Mainland, Inc., because based on the law unchallenged by the parties and used by the district court, and based on the factual record before the district court, the listing contracts were not the property of Main Realty, Inc.1 I respectfully dissent from that part of the majority opinion affirming the district court’s piercing Main Realty, Inc.’s corporate veil. This dissent is based on my conclusion the district court .erred in its application of controlling law, and…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Victoria Elevator Co. of Minneapolis v. Meriden Grain Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
  2. Labadie Coal Co. v. BlackCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1982
  3. Jablonsky v. KlemmNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1985
  4. Oxmans' Erwin Meat Co. v. BlacketerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Hilzendager v. SkwarokNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1983

15 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