Legal Opinion

United States v. Standard Beauty Supply Stores, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided September 22, 1977No. 75-2258PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SNEED, Circuit Judge:

Defendant Hal Linden appeals from the district court’s holding that Linden is per*775sonally liable for a default judgment against defendant Standard Beauty Supply Stores, Inc.1 The lower court held Linden liable for the judgment after finding that Standard Beauty was the alter ego of Linden. We remand for further consideration of the alter ego question. The district court’s holding was founded on an incorrect interpretation of California law. Specifically, the lower court mistakenly assumed that Standard Beauty’s failure to pay its California franchise taxes constituted…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Automotriz Del Golfo De California v. ResnickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Stark v. CokerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Arnold v. BrowneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
  4. Peacock Hill Ass'n v. Peacock Lagoon Construction Co.California Supreme Court · 1972
  5. Boyle v. Lakeview Creamery Co.California Supreme Court · 1937

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Shanghai Automation Instrument Co., Ltd. v. KueiDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2001
  2. Ca 79-3053 Publicker Industries, Inc. And Continental Distilling Corporation v. Roman Ceramics CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1979
  3. Labadie Coal Co. v. BlackCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1982
  4. National Labor Relations Board v. Greater Kansas City Roofing the New Greater Kansas City Roofing, Inc. Maude Clementine ClarkeCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1993
  5. Seymour v. Hull & Moreland EngineeringCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1979

12 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