44 Colo. App. 123 - Hill v. Dearmin’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 6 district · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently February 2012
3 federal appellate · 6 district · 11 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on 39 Colo. App. 84 - Rosebud Corp. v. Boggio · Fink v. Montgomery Elevator Company of Colorado · Contractors Heating and Supply Co. v. Scherb · 43 Colo. App. 409 - McHugh v. Ficor, Inc.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In 1 Fletcher, Cyclopedia of Corporations, § 41.1 it is stated in this regard: “. . . to establish the alter ego doctrine it must be shown that the stockholders’ disregard of the corporate entity made it a mere instrumentality for the transaction of their own affairs; that there is such unity of interest in ownership that the separate personalities of the corporation and the owners no longer exist; and to adhere to the doctrine of corporate entity would promote injustice or protect fraud.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It would frustrate the purposes of the corporate law to expose directors, officers, and shareholders to personal liability for the obligations of a corporation when they, in their individual capacities, contribute funds to, or on behalf of, a corporation for the purpose of assisting the corporation to meet its financial obligations, and not for the purposes of perpetrating a fraud or promoting their personal affairs.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[B]ecause the facts do not demonstrate that the corporation was a “mere instrumentality for the transaction of [the stockholders’] own affairs,” ... or that the corporation was used to perpetrate any fraud or to defeat any rightful claim, ... we conclude that the trial court erred in setting aside the corporate form and in imposing personal liability.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.