Canter v. Lakewood of Voorhees LP

22 A.3d 68 (2011)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Canter v. Lakewood of Voorhees LP

New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division
22 A.3d 68 (2011)

RW

Facts

Lakewood of Voorhees Associates LP (Lakewood) (defendant) was a well-capitalized limited partnership. Lakewood’s limited partner, Seniors Healthcare, Inc. (SHI) (defendant), owned the great majority of Lakewood’s shares. Even though the same team managed both Lakewood and SHI, the two companies operated independently of each other. Lakewood owned Lakewood of Voorhees Nursing Home (nursing home) (defendant). The contractor (defendant) that handled the nursing home’s day-to-day management was a wholly owned subsidiary of SHI. After sustaining injuries at the nursing home, Sanford Canter (plaintiff) sued Lakewood, SHI, the two companies’ management team, the nursing home, and the contractor for negligence. The trial court denied SHI’s motion for summary judgment on the grounds that the interlocking relationship between SHI, Lakewood, the nursing home, and the contractor raised a genuine question as to whether SHI controlled Lakewood’s operations. SHI appealed to the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Simonelli, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 824,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 824,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 824,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 989 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership