Opinion ID: 174747
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Liability of SSI/WCO Due to Fraudulent Dissolution

Text: In addition to granting summary judgment in favor of Bard/Davol, the district court also granted summary judgment in favor of SSI/WCO. The district court found that Campbell's claims against SSI/WCO were barred because, under Texas law, [6] a dissolved corporation can only be held liable for claims brought within three years of the dissolution. Campbell sued SSI/WCO more than four years after its dissolution. The only argument that Campbell makes on appeal with respect to the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of SSI/WCO is that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the asset sale and subsequent dissolution of SSI/WCO was merely a fraudulent transfer to avoid liability for a defective patch. Campbell argues on appeal that because SSI/WCO's dissolution was fraudulent, it should be revoked. This is the first time that Campbell has made any argument regarding the validity of SSI/WCO's dissolution. As discussed above, this court cannot consider issues that were not raised in the district court. See Morrow v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 541 F.2d 713, 724 (8th Cir.1976) (It is old and well-settled law that issues not raised in the trial court cannot be considered by this court as a basis for reversal.). Campbell asserts in her Reply Brief that the argument was properly presented to the district court. However, this court thoroughly reviewed the record and has not seen any evidence, nor has Campbell actually cited to any, that the argument was made at the district court level. Accordingly, the district court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of SSI/WCO.