Sea-Land Services, Inc. v. Pepper Source
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
941 F.2d 519 (1991)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
Gerald Marchese (defendant) owned six business entities (defendants). Marchese operated these entities out of the same office, with the same expense accounts. Marchese repeatedly borrowed and withdrew money from the entities to pay for his personal expenses. None of the entities ever held a corporate meeting, passed articles of incorporation, or had corporate bylaws. One of these entities, Pepper Source, owed Sea-Land Services, Inc. (Sea-Land) (plaintiff) approximately $87,000 for delivery services. Pepper Source had no assets. When Pepper Source did not pay, Sea-Land sued it in federal district court to recover the money. However, Pepper Source was dissolved by the state for failing to pay taxes. The court entered a default judgment against Pepper Source for the debt. Sea-Land then sued Marchese individually and Marchese’s other business entities, seeking to pierce the corporate veil to get paid. Sea-Land argued that Pepper Source and Marchese were alter egos of each other and therefore Marchese was personally liable for Pepper Source’s debt. Sea-Land also argued that the other business entities and Marchese were alter egos of each other, which allowed Sea-Land to reverse pierce the corporate veil to have these entities pay the debt Marchese owed on behalf of Pepper Source. The district court found that the entities were all alter egos of Marchese and granted summary judgment for Sea-Land. Marchese appealed to the Seventh Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Bauer, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 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.