United States Sixth Circuit

In a case arising from the breach of a lease agreement executed between plaintiff and a subsidiary of defendant, grant of defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted is affirmed where plaintiff had not alleged extraordinary circumstances that would warrant piercing the subsidiary's corporate veil in order to hold defendant liable for the breach of the lease.

Appellate Information

• Decided 08/30/2006
• Published 08/30/2006

Judges

• Before:  SUTTON and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges;  OBERDORFER, District Judge.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Eugene N. Bulso, Jr., Boult, Cummings, Conners & Berry, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellant.  Garry K. Grooms, Stites & Harbison, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee.   ON BRIEF:  Eugene N. Bulso, Jr., Melissa Ballengee Alexander, Boult, Cummings, Conners & Berry, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellant.  Garry K. Grooms, Stephen H. Price, Stites & Harbison, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee.