Kang Haggerty NewsKang Haggerty LLC is pleased to announce that four of the firm’s attorneys have been selected for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America© 2023. Congratulations to Henry J. Donner, Gregory H. Mathews, Kandis L. Kovalsky and Kyle T. Garabedian. Continue reading ›
Articles Tagged with Pennsylvania
Legal Intelligencer: Enterprise Liability and When to Seek Piercing the Corporate Veil, Part II
Because veil piercing is a highly fact-intensive inquiry, it can be difficult to predict in advance when a court will grant such a remedy. This is because, in addition to the multi-factor analysis that often goes into the decision of whether to pierce, there are also a variety of different forms that veil piercing can take.
In the May 12, 2022 edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Edward T. Kang of Kang Haggerty co-authored “Enterprise Liability and When to Seek Piercing the Corporate Veil, Part II.” Continue reading ›
Legal Intelligencer: Anticipation and Preparation: The Scope of the Pa. Work-Product Doctrine
In the April 14, 2022 edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Edward T. Kang of Kang Haggerty co-authored “Anticipation and Preparation: The Scope of the Pa. Work-Product Doctrine.”
The Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure are modeled after their federal counterparts and share much of the same language. Both contain provisions codifying the attorney work-product doctrine, and both use the phrase “prepared in anticipation of litigation” in defining the scope of this privilege. Despite this seemingly similar language, however, a stark distinction has emerged between the two. Continue reading ›
Legal Intelligencer: Enterprise Liability and When to Seek Piercing the Corporate Veil
In this column, we discuss Mortimer, the enterprise theory of liability generally, and the common sequencing decisions plaintiffs need to make when bringing a veil piercing claim.
In the September 9, 2021 edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Edward T. Kang of Kang Haggerty co-authored “Enterprise Liability and When to Seek Piercing the Corporate Veil.” Continue reading ›
Legal Intelligencer: Expert Witnesses in Pa.—What Materials Matter in Forming an Opinion?
Over both of counsel’s objections, the judge allowed the witness to continue with his testimony, in accordance with Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence 702 and 703 and the general acceptance test. This scenario raises the question: what materials can an expert witness rely on in Pennsylvania courts, which follows the Frye standard? And has this changed in recent years?
In the May 20, 2021 edition of The Legal Intelligencer Edward T. Kang, managing member of Kang Haggerty wrote “Expert Witnesses in Pa.—What Materials Matter in Forming an Opinion?” Continue reading ›
Legal Intelligencer: Piercing the Corporate Veil of LLCs Under Pennsylvania Law
Piercing the veil of limited liability companies (LLCs) allows a court to disregard the separate corporate personality of the company and its member(s) to reach the assets of the members and hold them liable for all or part of the LLC’s debts under Pennsylvania law.
In the September 3, 2020 edition of The Legal Intelligencer Edward T. Kang, managing member of Kang Haggerty wrote “Piercing the Corporate Veil of LLCs Under Pennsylvania Law.”
Piercing the veil of limited liability companies (LLCs) allows a court to disregard the separate corporate personality of the company and its member(s) to reach the assets of the members and hold them liable for all or part of the LLC’s debts under Pennsylvania law. Previously, I’ve written on the general substantive and procedural requirements of piercing the corporate veil of an entity and alter ego jurisdiction over corporate groups. This column addresses the Pennsylvania law on the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil as applied to LLCs.
Legal Intelligencer: Piercing the Corporate Veil of Corporate Groups to Establish Alter Ego Jurisdiction
When nonresident members of a corporate group, usually the parent company, should expect to be subjected to the jurisdiction of Pennsylvania courts when one of the entities, usually the subsidiary, is based or does business in the state.
In the June 18, 2020 edition of The Legal Intelligencer Edward T. Kang, managing member of Kang Haggerty wrote “Piercing the Corporate Veil of Corporate Groups to Establish Alter Ego Jurisdiction.”
Last June, in this space, I authored a column about Pennsylvania law on substantive and procedural aspects of piercing the corporate veil of companies to reach the assets of their shareholders or the assets of a parent company in corporate groups. In early January 2020, I wrote a column about the development of Pennsylvania law on establishing personal jurisdiction over registered nonresident businesses since the Supreme Court’s decisions in. In this case, I address the intersection of those two related columns in cases involving corporate groups. That is, when nonresident members of a corporate group, usually the parent company, should expect to be subjected to the jurisdiction of Pennsylvania courts when one of the entities, usually the subsidiary, is based or does business in the state.
Are you prepared for Post COVID-19 Litigation?
With Complaints Rapidly Increasing across the U.S., Now is the time to act
As of May 26, 2020, 2,278 complaints have been filed nationwide over the global pandemic COVID-19 according to the COVID-19 Complaint Tracker developed by lawyers at Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP. While the largest amount of these complaints deal with prison conditions and civil rights , the next highest areas of litigation involve insurance disputes, consumer disputes, labor and employment issues and contract disputes. Claims regarding employment, contracts and force majeure provisions, or clauses contained in contracts which excuse performance due to natural destructive acts also known as “acts of God,” are on the rise. These complaints will continue to be filed as the effects of COVID-19 continue to be felt in ever-changing ways. Many of these complaints have been filed in jurisdictions where Kang Haggerty regularly practices—namely COVID-19 hot spots New York, Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Continue reading ›
Kang Haggerty COVID-19 Resources: Preparing for Post COVID-19 Litigation
In a changing COVID-19 world filled with new regulations, adjustments, and uncertainty, Kang Haggerty provides services to help our clients avoid litigation or to obtain favorable outcomes in litigation. Some COVID-19 services offered by Kang Haggerty that will help you address COVID-19-related issues include: Continue reading ›
Jacklyn Fetbroyt Presenting for Doctor’s Advisory Alliance’s Guide to Getting Back
On Wednesday, May 27th Kang Haggerty Member Jacklyn Fetbroyt joins fellow DAA Board Members Frank Plum, Workplace HCM and Marie Manley, Hardenbergh Insurances to present Reopening Playbook: Changes to your Business Post-Pandemic.
Doctor’s Advisory Alliance is a group of business professionals in the Greater Philadelphia area that are dedicated to changing the way doctors and dentists are serviced in their professional and personal lives. Its goal is to fundamentally change the way doctors do business, allowing them to spend their time doing what they love, practicing medicine. We hold regular events throughout the Greater Philadelphia Area. These events are focused on identifying practice solutions for doctors and dentists in a relaxed and casual atmosphere.
Link to Full Flyer: DAA Guide to Getting Back