Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 23 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Quizhpe v. Luvin Construction Corp..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Quizhpe v. Luvin Construction Corp. Anchor | green | “a defendant may establish itself as the alter ego of a plaintiff's employer by demonstrating that one of the entities controls the other or that the two operate as a single integrated entity” | 10 |
| 2 | Batts v. IBEX Construction, LLC | green | “the protection against lawsuits brought by injured workers which is afforded to employers by workers' compensation law 11 and 29 (6) also extends to entities which are alter egos of the entity which employs the plaintiff” | 7 |
| 3 | Batts v. IBEX Construction, LLC | green | “a defendant moving for summary judgment based on the exclusivity defense of the workers' compensation law under this theory must show, prima facie, that it was the alter ego of the plaintiff's employer” | 6 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.