Radaszewski v. Telecom Corp.
Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals
981 F.2d 305 (1992)
- Written by Mary Pfotenhauer, JD
Facts
Radaszewski (plaintiff) was injured in an automobile accident when the motorcycle he was driving was struck by a truck driven by an employee of Contrux, Inc. Contrux, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Telecom Corporation (defendant). When Telecom formed Contrux, it contributed loans, not equity, and did not pay for all of the stock that was issued. Telecom did provide Contrux with $1 million in basic liability coverage, and $10 million in excess coverage. Contrux’s excess liability insurance carrier became insolvent two years after Radaszewski’s accident. Telecom argued that the district court lacked personal jurisdiction over it. The question of jurisdiction turned on whether Radaszewski could pierce the corporate veil and hold Telecom liable for the conduct of its subsidiary, Contrux. Telecom argued that the corporate veil could not be pierced on the basis of undercapitalization, because of the insurance it had provided to Contrux. The district court rejected Telecom’s argument that insurance could determine a subsidiary’s financial responsibility. The district court nonetheless held that it lacked jurisdiction over Telecom on other grounds.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Arnold, C.J.)
Dissent (Heaney, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
