Court Opinion

ID: 9513955
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 22:42:42.534555+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:06:06.742025
License: Public Domain

CROTHERS, Justice,
specially concurring.
[¶22] I agree the district court had personal jurisdiction over the defendants and that piercing the limited liability company’s veil of limited owner liability was not clearly erroneous. I specially concur in the latter holding to emphasize that the Court’s discussion at ¶ 15 of this ease should not be read to make disregarding an entity’s separate legal existence the rule, rather than the exception. My concerns are more fully explained in Axtmann v. Chillemi, 2007 ND 179, ¶¶ 28-44.
[¶ 23] Daniel J. Crothers