Verni v. Harry M. Stevens, Inc.
New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division
903 A.2d 475 (2006)
- Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Facts
Visibly drunk Daniel Lanzaro (defendant) was served beer at Giants Stadium. Afterward Lanzaro went to two bars, then drove drunk and hit a car driven by Ronald Verni (defendant). Injured passengers Fazila Verni and two-year-old Antonia Verni (plaintiffs) obtained a nearly $110 million judgment against Harry M. Stevens, Inc. of New Jersey (HMS), Aramark Services Management of New Jersey, Inc. (ASM), their parent, Aramark Corporation (AC), and its overseeing subsidiaries, Aramark Sports and Entertainment Group, Inc. (ASEG) (collectively, defendants). HMS held the liquor license and concession contract for the stadium, while ASM provided employees who ran concessions. HMS had no employees, business premises, or other income, but HMS and ASM had separate officers and directors and observed corporate formalities. ASEG shared officers with other entities within the organization, including HMS and ASM. ASM used the same address as AC and provided employees exclusively to AC subsidiaries. HMS’s and ASM’s debt exceeded assets by $14 million, but no evidence showed their initial capitalization or how much capital corporations their size needed to run stadium concessions. HMS deposited concession income into a single centralized AC account used to pay receivables, but paychecks cut to employees identified the appropriate subsidiary. All the subsidiaries reported revenues and liabilities separately, and no evidence showed commingling. AC’s chief financial officer testified AC formed subsidiaries to allow operations in multiple states. The trial court nonetheless pierced the corporate veil by holding AC and ASEG liable. All four corporations appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cuff, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 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.