The appellant was injured in a motor vehicle accident caused by an intoxicated driver who had been served alcohol at a nightclub operated by the corporate respondent.
The appellant sued the nightclub, its directors, and a related corporation, alleging overservice, failure to maintain adequate insurance, and improper conduct to render the nightclub judgment-proof.
The motion judge granted summary judgment dismissing the claims against the directors and the related corporation, finding insufficient evidence to pierce the corporate veil and that the insurance claim was statute-barred, but allowed the overservice claim against the nightclub to proceed.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that while the motion judge erred in some aspects of the legal test for piercing the corporate veil, the evidentiary record fell short of establishing the complete domination and fraudulent conduct required to pierce it.
The cross-appeal regarding the overservice claim was also dismissed.
