Is a parent company liable for the actions of a subsidiary?

"It is a general principle of corporate law deeply 'ingrained in our economic and legal systems' that a parent corporation (so-called because of control through ownership of another corporation's stock) is not liable for the acts of its subsidiaries." United States v. Bestfoods, 524 U.S. 51, 61 (1998). "[A]ctivities that involve the facility but which are consistent with the parent's investor status, such as monitoring of the subsidiary's performance, supervision of the subsidiary's finance and capital budget decisions, and articulation of general policies and procedures, should not give rise to direct liability." Id. at 72 (alteration in original). But a parent company may be "directly liable for its own actions" where "the alleged wrong can seemingly be traced to the parent through the conduit of its own personnel and management" and "the parent is directly a participant in the wrong complained of." See id. at 64-65. Additionally, "the corporate veil may be pierced and the [parent company] held liable for the [subsidiary] corporation's conduct

Page 26