Industry question

"Bob" wrote in message
ups.com...
I too am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that the suer would just name
all the LLCs in the filing and to me it seems perfectly reasonable to
do so.


I believe it's called "piercing the corporate veil."

Piercing the corporate veil refers to getting past the corporation and
making the owners personally liable, both financially and jail time
wise.

Which can be done by: showing the LLC or other entity is not
functioning as an LLC, (mixing of personal and business assets), or by
showing the LLC was not carrying out the normal business processes of a
corporation plus some other stratgies which escape me at the moment.
Oh, yeah, showing the officers knowing broke the law.

By stacking LLCs or any other business entity it appears to me the
previous poster is trying to greatly increase the amount of work a
lawyer would have to do to work his/her way up the chain to the assets
and hence make it less appealing. But if they are ALL owned/controlled
by the same people/entities, it seems to me a judge would allow them to
be all grouped together. And that is my question, I am wondering how
good a strategy that is, in the case where all the entities are
controlled or owned by the same group.

Also a common strategy I hear about is signing your house over to your
wife. But again I wonder how good of a strategy is that?

When I ran a flying club that owned a plane, we quickly ruled out a
partnership, the assumption of shared liability is a given. So if
member X flew into a high dollar asset the members Y and Z are
automatically assumed to be co-liable. Not so in a corp. Hence the
XXXXX Aero Club LLC.








larsen-tools wrote:
"Bob" wrote in message
ups.com...
I too am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that the suer would just
name
all the LLCs in the filing and to me it seems perfectly reasonable
to
do so.


I believe it's called "piercing the corporate veil."