Bogdanov v. People (1997)

Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1004 (Colo. 1998).

Bogdanov v. People, 941 P.2d 247 , 254 n.10, amended, 955 P.2d 997 (Colo.1997), abrogated on other grounds by Griego v. People, 19 P.3d 1, 7 (Colo.2001). . 1150 "The language contained in the brackets [noted above] should be included in the complicity jury instruction only in those cases where [two] or more persons, possibly including the defendant, together committed the essential elements of the underlying erime." Bogdanow, 955 P.2d at 997.

Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1000 (Colo.1998).

Leonard, 63 P.3d at 330 ; Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1004 (Colo.1998).

Leonard, 63 P.3d at 330 ; Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1004 (Colo.1998).

See Fink v. Montgomery Elevator Co. of Colo., 421 P.2d 735, 737 (Colo. 1966) (“[A] party is not liable upon a contract signed by him on behalf of another . . . when he has given notice to the third party that there is [a] principal for whom he acts and also notice of the name or identity of the principal.”); Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1001 (Colo. 1998) (“If both the existence and identity of the agent’s principal are fully disclosed to the other party…

See Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1001 (Colo. 1998) (“If both the existence and identity of the agent’s principal are fully disclosed to the other party, the agent does not become a party to any contract which he negotiates.”) (citation omitted); see also Restatement (Third) of Agency § 6.01 cmt. d (Am.

The final prong of the veil piercing inquiry considers “whether an equitable result will be achieved by disregarding the corporate form and holding the shareholder personally liable for the acts of the business entity.” Phillips, 139 P.3d at 644 (citing Water, Waste & Land, Inc., v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1004 (Colo. 1998)); see also Great Neck, 37 P.3d at 490 (“Piercing the corporate veil is an equitable remedy, requiring balancing of the equities in each particular case.”).

The third of its kind in the country, the Act “includes some of the same basic features found in the Uniform Limited Liability Company Act of 1996 (‘Model Act’) drafted by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws.” LaFond, ¶ 15, 343 P.3d at 944 ; Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1000 (Colo. 1998).

The third of its kind in the country, the Act “includes some of the same basic features found in the Uniform Limited Liability Company Act of 1996 (‘Model Act’) drafted by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws.” LaFond, ¶ 15, 343 P.3d at 944 ; Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1000 (Colo. 1998).

Id.; Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1004 (Colo. 1998); Great Neck Plaza, L.P. v. Le Peep Restaurants, LLC, 37 P.3d 485, 490 (Colo. App. 2001).

See Restatement (Third) of Agency § 6.01 cmt. c ("Whether the existence and identity of any principal have been disclosed are questions of fact."); id. § 6.02 cmt. d ("It is a question of fact whether a third party has such notice [of a principal's identity]."); id. § 6.01 cmt. c ("It is a question of fact whether facts known by a third party gave the third party reason to know that person with whom it dealt acted as agent on behalf of a disclosed principal."); id. § 6.03 cm…

Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1000 (Colo.1998).

Veil-piercing remains the exception, not the rule, and the corporate veil will be pierced only in "extraordinary circumstances.” Phillips, 139 P.3d at 644 (citing Leonard v. McMorris, 63 P.3d 323, 330 (Colo.2003) and Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1004 (Colo.1998)). .

To pierce the corporate veil under Colorado law, the claimant must show that (1) “the corporate entity is the alter ego of the shareholder,” (2) “justice requires” the veil to be pierced because “the corporate fiction was used to perpetrate a fraud or defeat a rightful claim ... [and] to shield a dominant shareholder’s improprieties,” and (3) “an equitable result will be achieved by ... holding the shareholder personally liable for the acts of the business entity.” Connolly …

Phillips, 139 P.3d at 644 ; Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1004 (Colo.1998); Great Neck, 37 P.3d 485 at 490 .

Bogdanov v. People, supra, 941 P.2d at 254 n. 10, 955 P.2d at 997.

See Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1003 (Colo. 1998); Knight, 537 P.2d at 1086 (“At common law, a person could adopt another name at will.”).

See, e.g., Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997 , 1002 (Colo.1998) ; Filho v. Rodriguez, 36 P.3d 199 , 200 (Colo.App.2001) ; Restatement (Third) of Agency § 6.03 (2006) (hereinafter Restatement).

See, e.g. , Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham , 955 P.2d 997, 1002 (Colo. 1998); Filho v. Rodriguez , 36 P.3d 199, 200 (Colo. App. 2001); Restatement (Third) of Agency § 6.03 (2006) (hereinafter Restatement).

See, e.g. , Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham , 955 P.2d 997, 1002 (Colo. 1998); Filho v. Rodriguez , 36 P.3d 199, 200 (Colo. App. 2001); Restatement (Third) of Agency § 6.03 (2006) (hereinafter Restatement).

See Bogdanov v. People, 941 P.2d 247 , 252–53 (Colo. 1997) (“Structural errors are not amenable to either a harmless or a plain error analysis because such errors affect ‘the framework within which the trial proceeds,’ and are not errors in the trial process itself.” (quoting Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279, 310 (1991))), amended, 955 P.2d 997 (Colo. 1997) (mem.), disapproved of on different grounds by Griego v. People, 19 P.3d 1 (Colo. 2001); Griego, 19 P.3d a…

See Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1000 (Colo.1998); Sheffield, 211 P.3d at 719 .

See generally Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997 (Colo.1998)(when the district court exercises its authority to decide the case based on the record developed below, as opposed to a trial de novo, it acts as a reviewing court and must accept the facts as found by the county court, and its review is limited to the sufficiency of the evidence); People v. Anderson, 177 Colo. 84 , 492 P.2d 844 (1972).

See Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1001-04 (Colo.1998) (holding owner of limited liability company may be personally liable to third party if owner acts as agent for company and fails to disclose existence and identity of principal). [¶ 12] Moreover, the operating agreement for the M.A.H.D.

See Bogdanov v. People, 941 P.2d 247 , 254 n. 10, amended by 955 P.2d 997 (Colo. 1997), disapproved of by Griego v. People, 19 P.3d 1 (Colo. 2001); COLJI-Crim Gl:06 (2008). 2 Jury instruction 23, taken from People v. Alvarado, 284 P.3d 99, 102, 103 (Colo. App. 2011), contained the approved supplemental instruction given in that case, and a paraphrased portion of the court’s analysis.

See Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1000 (Colo.1998); see §§ 7-80-101 to -1101, C.R.S.2011 (Colorado Limited Liability Company Act).

See Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997, 1003 (Colo.1998); Sheffield Services Co. v. Trowbridge, 211 P.3d 714, 720 (Colo.App.2009).

See Bogdanov v. People, 941 P.2d 247, 258-54 (Colo.1997), modified, 955 P.2d 997 (Colo.1997), disapproved of on other grounds by Griego v. People, 19 P.3d 1 (Colo. *1185 2001); People v. Close, 22 P.3d 983, 987 (Colo.App.2000), aff'd, 48 P.3d 528 (Colo.2002).

A person is liable as a principal for the behavior of another "if, with the intent to promote or facilitate the commission of the offense, he or she aids, abets, advises, or encourages the other person in planning or committing the offense." § 18-1-603; see Bogdanov v. People, 941 P.2d 247, 252 (Colo.) ("the complicitor must have the culpable mental state required for the underlying crime committed by the prin-cipall, and] ... the complicitor must intend that his own conduct…

See Bogdanov v. People, 941 P.2d 247, 255 (Colo.1997), amended, 955 P.2d 997 (Colo.1997), disapproved of on other grounds by Griego v. People, 19 P.3d 1 (Colo.2001).

Gleason v. Becker-Johnson Assocs., Inc., 916 P.2d 662 (Colo.App.1996); see Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997 (Colo.1998).

See generally Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997 (Colo.1998).

See generally Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997 (Colo.1998).

See Bogdanov v. People, 941 P.2d 247 , amended, 955 P.2d 997 (Colo.1997).

People v. Garcia, supra, 28 P.3d at 344 ; see also Bogdanov v. People, 941 P.2d 247, 255-56 , amended, 955 P.2d 997 (Colo.1997).

See Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997 (Colo.1998)(a partially disclosed principal is one whose existence, but not identity, is known to the other party).

See Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham, 955 P.2d 997 (Colo.1998).

See Bogdanov v. People, 941 P.2d 247 (Colo.1997), as amended, 955 P.2d 997 (Colo.1997).

See Water, Waste & Land, Inc. v. Lanham , 955 P.2d 997, 1001-04 (Colo. 1998) (holding owner of limited liability company may be personally liable to third party if owner acts as agent for company and fails to disclose existence and identity of principal). [¶12] Moreover, the operating agreement for the M.A.H.D.