Opinion ID: 657359
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Cozzi and ASP as one corporate entity

Text: 23 In a final effort to prevent the jury from deciding the negligence issues, Cozzi asked the district court to pierce the corporate veil and find that ASP was so highly integrated with the Cozzi corporation that they should be treated as one corporate entity for the purpose of applying the exclusivity provision of the Indiana Worker's Compensation Act. Piercing the corporate veil requires that separate corporate identity be disregarded where one corporation is so organized and controlled and its affairs are so conducted by another corporation that it is a mere instrumentality or adjunct of the other corporation. 24 The district court correctly rejected Cozzi's efforts to characterize ASP as a mere instrumentality of Cozzi. The record is replete with evidence that ASP and Cozzi are distinct and separately operated corporations and that Cozzi made significant and continuing efforts to maintain separate corporate entities. There is no basis in fact for treating Cozzi and ASP as one corporate entity and therefore we affirm the district court. 9 D. Cozzi's Right to a Set-Off 25 If Reboy prevails on the employment issue at retrial, all parties agree that he will have to repay the worker compensation benefits he received after his accident to prevent a double recovery. If this occurs, we ask the district court to clarify in an order whom Reboy must repay and the amount that must be repaid.