Foodland Distributors v. Al-Naimi
Michigan Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtGribbs, J.
We concur in that part of Judge O’Connell’s opinion finding a fraudulent conveyance as discussed in part A of § vm of his opinion. However, the overwhelming evidence establishes fraud and an ample basis to pierce the corporate veil and permit plaintiff to recover the $697,952 for unpaid grocery products.* 1
Plaintiff argues that the trial court erred in not piercing the corporate veil of Metropolitan Grocery, Inc (New Metro), thereby permitting plaintiff to reach the assets of Amir Al-Naimi, Sandra Al-Naimi, and Atour Abro. We agree. In light of plaintiff’s evidence and the entire spectrum of…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Hi-Way Motor Co. v. International Harvester Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1976
- Wells v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1985
- Law Offices of Lawrence J Stockler, PC v. RoseMichigan Court of Appeals · 1989
- Herman v. Mobile Homes Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1947
- Kline v. KlineMichigan Court of Appeals · 1981
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by63 opinions
- Derderian v. Genesys Health Care SystemsMichigan Court of Appeals · 2004
- Servo Kinetics, Inc. v. Tokyo Precision Instruments Co. Ltd. Moog, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007
- Helena Agri-Enterprises, LLC v. Great Lakes Grain, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2021
- Rymal v. BaergenMichigan Court of Appeals · 2004
- Green v. ZiegelmanMichigan Court of Appeals · 2015
58 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.