Filed: October 26, 2017
Opinion
by: Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander
Holding:
Under
Maryland law, the liability protections afforded to limited liability company
(“LLC”) members with respect to obligations of an LLC did not support dismissal
of claims that an individual engaged in unfair competition and deceptive trade
practices by forming and participating in an LLC, where the plaintiff alleged conduct
supporting direct claims against the individual.
Facts:
A
Maryland LLC, Farm Fresh Direct by a Cut Above LLC (“Plaintiff”), brought suit
against multiple defendants, including another Maryland LLC, Farm Fresh Direct
Home Food Services, LLC (“Defendant LLC”), and an individual who allegedly
filed Defendant LLC’s Articles of Organization with the Maryland State
Department of Assessments and Taxation (“Defendant Individual” and together
with Defendant LLC, the “Defendants”), alleging that the Defendants engaged in
unfair competition in violation of both Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act,
codified at 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), and Maryland common law, by establishing
and engaging in a competing business under a name which was confusingly similar
to the name of the Plaintiff. The
Defendant Individual moved, pro se, to
dismiss the action. Despite construing
the motion liberally in favor of the Defendant Individual, the district court
denied the motion, holding that the Plaintiff had alleged sufficient facts to
satisfy the pleading requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a).
Analysis:
The
district court analyzed as a threshold issue whether the Defendant Individual was
subject to suit in light of the Defendant LLC’s status as a Maryland LLC. The district court’s analysis begins with a
review of Maryland and Fourth Circuit law regarding the corporate shield and
the corresponding LLC shield. The court
then notes that, notwithstanding the LLC shield, which generally protects LLC
members from personal liability for obligations of the LLC, the LLC shield does
not protect LLC members from direct liability for that member’s own
actions. Because Plaintiff alleged that
the Defendant Individual formed the Defendant LLC and acted as its resident
agent, the district court held that Plaintiff had alleged sufficient facts to
plead direct claims against the Defendant Individual. Further, because Plaintiff alleged that the
name of the Defendant LLC was confusingly similar to the name of the Plaintiff
and that the Defendant LLC engaged in substantially the same business as the
Plaintiff, the district court held that Plaintiff alleged sufficient facts to
plead claims of unfair competition and deceptive trade practices under Maryland
and Federal law. Accordingly, the
district court denied Defendant Individual’s motion to dismiss.
The full
opinion is available in PDF.
Opinions and conclusions in this post are solely those of
the author unless otherwise indicated. The information contained in this blog
is general in nature and is not offered and cannot be considered as legal
advice for any particular situation. The author has provided the links
referenced above for information purposes only and by doing so, does not adopt
or incorporate the contents. Any federal tax advice provided in this
communication is not intended or written by the author to be used, and cannot
be used by the recipient, for the purpose of avoiding penalties which may be
imposed on the recipient by the IRS. Please contact the author if you would
like to receive written advice in a format which complies with IRS rules and
may be relied upon to avoid penalties.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please Post Comments Here