Legal Opinion · Dissent

Danziger v. Luse

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 13, 2004No. 2002-1880Published

1DissentO’Donnell, J.

{¶ 27} Treatment of the bank in this case as the alter ego of Croghan Bancshares, Inc. represents an unprecedented departure from the traditional application of the alter-ego doctrine. A review of cases from across the country reveals that courts are reluctant to disregard the separate corporate existence of a subsidiary company that conducts its business in corporate form. The facts of this case demonstrate the existence of a classic parent-subsidiary corporate relationship and do not support the majority’s conclusion that Croghan “so controls and dominates the [bank] that the separate…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. United States v. BestfoodsSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  2. State, Dept. of Environ. Protect. v. Ventron Corp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1983
  3. Berkey v. Third Avenue Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1926
  4. Belvedere Condominium Unit Owners' Ass'n v. R.E. Roark Companies, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1993
  5. Gentry v. Credit Plan Corporation of HoustonTexas Supreme Court · 1975

27 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