Unichem Manufacturing Co. v. Witco Chemical Corp.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Unichem Manufacturing Co. v. Witco Chemical Corp.

522 So. 2d 98, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 746, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1159

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 22, 1988

DocketNos. 87-803, 87-1727

StatusPublished

This text of 522 So. 2d 98 (Unichem Manufacturing Co. v. Witco Chemical Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Unichem Manufacturing Co. v. Witco Chemical Corp., 522 So. 2d 98, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 746, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1159 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the summary judgments under review. In ruling that Unichem Manufacturing Co., Inc. could not amend its counterclaim to join as a counterclaimant MIC International Corp., which was not then a party in the suit, the trial court correctly applied the general rule “that no counterclaim will be allowed to the defendant which requires the bringing in of third parties who may have independent claims against the complaint.” Durham Tropical Land Corp. v. Sun Garden Sales Co., 106 Fla. 429, 437-38, 151 So. 327, 327-28 (1932). Contrary to Unichem’s contention, this rule applies even if Unichem and MIC are so interrelated that they should be treated as one company, because, as is also well established, the corporate veils chosen by the principals of Unichem and MIC may not be removed by them for the purpose of seeking affirmative relief. Resorts International, Inc. v. Charter Air Center, Inc., 503 So.2d 1293, 1295-96 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), and cases cited therein.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the summary judgments under review. In ruling that Unichem Manufacturing Co., Inc. could not amend its counterclaim to join as a counterclaimant MIC International Corp., which was not then a party in the suit, the trial court correctly applied the general rule “that no counterclaim will be allowed to the defendant which requires the bringing in of third parties who may have independent claims against the complaint.” Durham Tropical Land Corp. v. Sun Garden Sales Co., 106 Fla. 429, 437-38, 151 So. 327, 327-28 (1932). Contrary to Unichem’s contention, this rule applies even if Unichem and MIC are so interrelated that they should be treated as one company, because, as is also well established, the corporate veils chosen by the principals of Unichem and MIC may not be removed by them for the purpose of seeking affirmative relief. Resorts International, Inc. v. Charter Air Center, Inc., 503 So.2d 1293, 1295-96 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), and cases cited therein.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

522 So. 2d 98, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 746, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1159, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/unichem-manufacturing-co-v-witco-chemical-corp-fladistctapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack