Should Insider Reverse Veil Piercing Be Applied To Protect Constitutional Rights?

Allen Matkins
Contact

Allen Matkins

Last Friday's post addressed Vice Chancellor Slights' novel ruling that outsider reverse veil piercing is an equitable remedy that is available in Delaware.  Manichaean Capital v. Excela Technologies, Inc., 2021 Del. Ch. LEXIS 100.  What about insider reverse veil piercing?  Insider reverse veil piercing occurs when a shareholder seeks to disregard the corporate entity.  Professor Stephen Bainbridge recently makes the case that insider reverse veil piercing is "s the only doctrinal way of deciding when a corporation's shareholders may assert their free exercise rights when the state infringes on those rights by regulating their corporation".

Professor Bainbridge post identifies a number of defects in the amicus brief filed by 44 law professors in Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. v. Sebelius, 133 S. Ct. 641 (2012).  Readers may recall that I too found fault with the academy's brief but for a different reason: 44 Law Professors Make A Case Against Corporate Social Responsibility.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Allen Matkins | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Allen Matkins
Contact
more
less

Allen Matkins on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide

This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.