• HOME
  • SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS
  • PROFILE
  • ALLEN MATKINS
  • CONTACT
Print Email Shortlink

Dissolution Does Not Preclude Entry Of Default Judgment Against Nevada Corporation(?)

By Keith Paul Bishop on September 25, 2012 in Limited Liability Companies, Nevada Corporations

Stephens Media, LLC is the publisher of the Las Vegas Review-Journal.  In 2009, Stephens Media filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court against Citihealth, L.L.C. alleging a variety of trademark related claims.  Citihealth failed to respond to the suit and Stephens Media filed a motion for entry of a default judgment.  One of the co-owners of Citihealth then notified the court that Citihealth had dissolved and that he and the other co-owner had filed for personal bankruptcy.  In ruling on the motion, U.S. District Court Judge Miranda Du reviewed seven factors that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has identified as relevant to the exercise of a court’s discretion whether to grant entry of a default.  Stephens Media LLC v. CitiHealth, L.L.C., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109431 (D. Nev., Aug. 6, 2012) One of these caught my eye – excusable neglect.

In analyzing whether there had been excusable neglect on the part of Citihealth, Judge Du observed:

Although CitiHealth dissolved after the filing of this lawsuit, Nevada corporate law does not excuse dissolved business entities from defending actions pending against them.  See NRS § 78.585.  Indeed, at least one of CitiHealth’s officers had sufficient notice of the suit to file with the Court a letter notifying the Court and Stephens of CitiHealth’s dissolution and the pending bankruptcy filings of both owners.  Therefore, it is unlikely that CitiHealth’s failure to respond and subsequent default resulted from excusable neglect.

This certainly sounds plausible until one considers Citihealth’s full name – Citihealth, L.L.C.  The name suggest that Citihealth isn’t a corporation, but a limited liability company.  A check of the Nevada Secretary of State’s website confirms that Citihealth is indeed a dissolved domestic limited liability company, not a corporation.  Thus, it is subject to Chapter 86 of Nevada Revised Statutes, not Chapter 78.  Both chapters are covered in my book.

Chapter 86default judgmentdissolutionNevada limited liability companyNRS 78.585
  • Related Stories
  • Most Popular
  • Ever Wonder What Money Is? California Has Some Answers And I Have Some Questions
  • Bitcoin And The Corporations Code
  • If You’re Relying On The Signature Of Two Officers, You May Want To Think Again
  • Court Explicates Scope of Usury Exemption For Real Estate Brokers
  • Supreme Court To Decide If It Will Decide Whether Section 16 Plaintiff Has Constitutional Standing
  • But Wait, California May Require Even More In Annual Reports To Shareholders
  • Conflict Minerals Bill In Suspense File (For Now)
  • Concurrent Jurisdiction Found For Covered Class Actions
  • Nevada Supreme Court Adopts Delaware Approach To Fair Value Burden Of Proof
  • SEC Proposes John Wilkes Booth Rules
  • If I Were A Carpenter, I’d Build A Better Proxy
  • CalPERS’ Annus Horribilis: How Much Worse Will It Get?
← Previous Next →

AUTHOR

Keith Paul Bishop
Partner
(949) 553-1313
kbishop@allenmatkins.com
CONTACT ME

RECOGNITION

NEWSLETTER

TOPICS

  • Accountants
  • Administrative Procedure
  • Attorney-Client Privilege/Work Product
  • Broker-Dealers
  • California Securities Laws
  • California Sui Generis
  • CalPERS/CalSTRS
  • Choice of Law/Conflict of Law
  • Corporate Governance
  • Department of Corporations
  • Derivative Suits
  • Enforcement & Investigations
  • Fairness Hearings
  • Finance Lenders
  • Financial Institutions
  • Investment Advisers
  • JOBS Act
  • Legislation
  • Limited Liability Companies
  • Mergers & Acquisitions
  • Nevada Corporations
  • Non-Compete Agreements
  • Partnerships
  • Professional Responsibility
  • Pseudo-Foreign Corporations
  • Public Records Act/FOIA
  • Secretary of State
  • Securities Litigation
  • Uncategorized
  • Video

YOUTUBE

TWITTER

FACEBOOK

CALENDAR

September 2012
M T W T F S S
« Aug   Oct »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Copyright © 2013 California Corporate & Securities Law.

Powered by WordPress and News.

  • follow:follow:
  • Become my Facebook friend Become my Facebook friend
  • Connect with me Connect with me
  • RSS RSS
  • Tweet with me Tweet with me