Part II.A of this Comment will discuss the history and purpose of the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil. Part II.B will describe the evolution of this doctrine within Ohio from the development of the Belvedere three-part test, through the conflict among the courts of appeals that gave rise to the Supreme Court of Ohio's latest attempt at clarification. Part III will discuss the facts and procedural history of Dombroski v. WellPoint, Inc. Part IV.A will show how the Supreme Court of Ohio's modification of the Belvedere test will inevitably cause another conflict among the courts of appeals. Part IV.B will explain that the Supreme Court of Ohio must adopt a clear standard that permits piercing for “fraud or similarly wrongful acts” to avoid another conflict among Ohio's courts of appeals.


Case Comment