Case: Azte Inc. Vs. Auto Collection

“The idea that a corporation is a legal person with constitutional rights is, of course, a controversial one. Some commentators argue that it's bad policy. In my view, however, it is a well-settled principle of US constitutional law and justifiably so. The legislative history of the Fourteenth Amendment suggests that Congress substituted the word ''person'' for the word ''citizen'' precisely so that the provisions so affected would protect not just natural persons but also legal persons, such as corporations, from oppressive legislation.”

Quality Associates, Inc., a consulting firm, advises its clients about sampling and statistical procedures that can be used to control their manufacturing processes. IN one particular application, a client game quality associates a sample of 800 observations taken during a time in which that client's process was operating satisfactorily. The sample standard deviation for there data was .21 ; hence, with so much data, the population standard deviation was assumed to be .21. Quality associates then suggested that random samples of size 30 be taken periodically to monitor the process on an ongoing basis. BY analyzing the new samples, the client could quickly learn whether the process was operating satisfactorily. when the process was not

Although courts are reluctant to hold an active shareholder liable for actions that are legally the responsibility of the corporation, even if the corporation has a single shareholder, they will often do so if the corporation was markedly noncompliant, or if holding only the corporation liable would be singularly unfair to the plaintiff. The ruling is based on common law precedents. In the US, different theories, most important "alter ego" or "instrumentality rule", attempted to create a piercing standard. Generally, the plaintiff has to prove that the incorporation was merely a formality and that the corporation neglected corporate formalities and protocols, such as voting to approve major corporate actions in the context of a duly authorized corporate meeting. This is quite often the case when a corporation facing legal liability transfers its assets and business to another corporation with the same management and shareholders. It also happens with single person corporations that are managed in a haphazard manner. As such, the veil can be pierced in both civil cases and where regulatory proceedings are taken against a shell corporation.

First, "Corporate cases should not be resolved without a clear plan to resolve related individual cases before the status of limitation expires and declinations to individuals in such cases must be memorialized" (Yates 6). To fulfill this requirement, when a corporation is working toward closure or to resolve a case, the company needs to be accompanied by a proper and responsive plan for the prosecution of alleged engaged employees or an explanation for a declination of prosecution. Second, "Absent extraordinary circumstances, no corporate resolution will provide protection from criminal or civil liability for any individuals" (Yates 5). Under this step, the Department of Justice would preserve its ability to pursue individuals when reaching a settlement with the corporation. It will no longer allow a corporation to shield its employees from prosecution by entering a resolution. Thus, due to these two key steps, I believe corporations will work with federal prosecutors in a proactive approach to identify all the related information of the alleged misconduct and the responsible

Keegan, T. (2012). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Kirtsaeng. New York Law School Law Review,

Another argument that is made regarding corporations having individual rights revolves around the legal right for a company to sue and be sued in the court of law.

Your honors, this case is about the fundamental right of shareholder protection. The right of a small businesswoman to pursue her goals and not be punished for her initiative and contribution that is so essential to American business. That is the right

901Attorney, LLC is a personal injury law firm that is located in Memphis, Tennessee. This law firm is licensed both in Tennessee and Arkansas. 901Attorney, LLC has over 25 years of experience. Their areas of practice include auto accidents, slip and fall, and animal cases. In 2016, David A. McLaughlin, Esq. has been selected by Thomson Reuters and has been rated by Super Lawyers.

Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s were involved in an automobile accident that occurred on 3 November, 2010. Whereby, the Plaintiff’s are suing for personal injury as a result of injuries sustained or allegedly sustained during subject accident. The NY Supreme Court, Queens County decided the case and no lower courts authored any opinion.

Issue: Should the Court rule as time-barred the Plaintiff’s claims which he makes under the Massachusetts ‘Blue Sky’ securities fraud statute and as lacking as a matter of law the Plaintiff’s claim on the Defendants’ unfair trade practices?

The plaintiff in the case is Vassilkovska and the defendant is Woodfield. Nadejda Vassilkovska bought a used car from Woodfield Nissan. In a separate agreement other than the contract, Nadejda Vassilkovska promised to arbitrate claims against Woodfield instead of suing in court. Woodfield promised to arbitrate claims against Vassilkovska as well. However, Woodfields agreement contained complete exemption for issues that could arise from the sales of the automobile. Vassilkovska sued Woodfield for misrepresenting the price of the car in a financing agreement.

In the case of L and V Contractors, LLC v. Heritage Warranty Insurance Risk Retention Group, Inc., et al the vehicle owner and plaintiff, Alejandro Leone sued AAMCO and Drive Train for fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation and statutory theft. Claims were also bought against Heritage Insurance. The charges against the aforementioned defendants stem for the interactions the plaintiff had with each party.

In the Encyclopaedia of White-Collar Crime, co-authors Jurg Gerber and Eric. L Jensen define corporate crime as “violations of federal or state laws that are committed by employees on behalf of the company rather than simply for their own gain.” The definition and classification of what falls under a corporate crime is highly problematic in that corporations can afford defence lawyers that can find loopholes in the legislation in order to avoid charges. Even more perplexing, is that “corporations define the laws under which they live” according to Russell Mokhiber report’s Top 100 Corporate Criminals of the Decade (1996) published in the Corporate Crime Reporter. Mokhiber introduces the example that “the automobile industry... has worked its will on Congress to block legislation that would impose criminal sanctions on knowing and wilful

Since corporations are not physical things or people, it is very easy for them to avoid any kind of trouble. Corporations have become great at passing on their externalities to the public. An externality is an expense of any kind, whether it is something such as environmental damage or forcing people in an area to pay money for something, that a corporation forces the public to pay for while they privatize all profits. Corporations being externalizing machines fit in very well with their psychopathic behavior. They externalize any cost to the public because they can and it helps them achieve their goal of making as much money as possible. A quote from Robert Monks puts it very well, he says “The corporation is an externalizing machine

This doctrine has been seen as a “two- edged sword,” reason being that at a general level while it was seen as a good decision in that by establishing that corporations are separate legal entities, Salomon 's case endowed the company with the entire requisite attributes with which to become the powerhouse of capitalism. At a particular level, however, it was a bad decision. By extending the benefits of incorporation to small private enterprises, Salomon 's case has promoted fraud and the evasion of legal obligations.