J.D. Fields & Co. v. Nottingham Construction Co.

|,I agree that Wharton-Smith, Inc., did not contractually assume any obligations owed by Nottingham Construction Co., LLC to J.D. Fields & Company, Inc., and that Wharton-Smith did riot bécome liable as á “successor corporation” under the “continuation” doctrine when it purchased many of Nottingham’s assets. However, I respectfully disagree that the focus of the inquiry under the.‘‘continuation” doctrine is whether “all or substantially all” of the assets were assigned. Rather, the appropriate analysis under that doctrine, has been established by our supreme court as follows:

*104In the case of a…