West Point Construction Co. v. Helms, (Edd), Inc.
This text of 581 So. 2d 183 (West Point Construction Co. v. Helms, (Edd), Inc.) 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.
Opinion
West Point Construction Company appeals from a final judgment in favor of defendants, Helms (Edd), Inc., and Edd Helms. We affirm. West Point failed to demonstrate the requisite improper conduct to justify piercing the corporate veil, see Dania Jai-Alai Palace, Inc. v. Sykes, 450 So.2d 1114 (Fla.1984), or to establish defendants’ tortious interference with the contracts so as to preclude a directed verdict. See Ethyl Corp. v. Balter, 386 So.2d 1220 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), review denied, 392 So.2d 1371 (Fla.), cert. denied, 452 U.S. 955, 101 S.Ct. 3099, 69 L.Ed.2d 965 (1981); Babson Bros. Co. v. Allison, 337 So.2d 848 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976), cert. denied, 348 So.2d 944 (Fla.1977); see also Covert v. Terri Aviation, Inc., 197 So.2d 12 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967); Days v. Florida East Coast Ry. Co., 165 So.2d 434 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
581 So. 2d 183, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 4386, 1991 WL 72058, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/west-point-construction-co-v-helms-edd-inc-fladistctapp-1991.