Case Citation
Legal Case Name

NLRB v. West Dixie Enterprises Case Brief

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit1999Docket #2416306
190 F.3d 1191 1999 WL 766237 Labor Law Corporations Administrative Law

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: The court upheld an NLRB order holding a company’s owners personally liable for unfair labor practices. The court found the NLRB had jurisdiction and that the owners were alter egos of the corporation due to commingled assets and a disregard for corporate formalities.

Legal Significance: This case establishes that federal common law, not state law, governs the piercing of the corporate veil in NLRA cases. It adopts the two-prong test for alter ego liability, holding individuals responsible for a corporation’s unfair labor practices to prevent injustice or evasion of obligations.

NLRB v. West Dixie Enterprises Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

West Dixie Enterprises, Inc. was an electrical contracting corporation owned by Carole Ann Paolicelli, with her husband, Paul Paolicelli, directing daily operations. The Paolicellis frequently commingled personal and corporate finances, using personal checks and credit cards to pay for company payroll and supplies. Conversely, corporate funds were used to pay rent on Mr. Paolicelli’s personal apartment for six months. No records were kept to document these transactions as bona fide loans. In 1994, the company committed several unfair labor practices, including refusing to hire union members and threatening union supporters. During a six-month period in 1994, the company made over $50,000 in interstate purchases. The corporation was administratively dissolved in August 1994 for failure to file an annual report, but the Paolicellis continued to operate the business under the West Dixie name. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers filed a charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). An ALJ found the company committed unfair labor practices and held the Paolicellis personally liable as alter egos. The NLRB affirmed, and the Paolicellis appealed the jurisdictional and alter ego findings.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Can individual owners of a corporation be held personally liable as alter egos for the corporation’s unfair labor practices under the National Labor Relations Act when they have commingled personal and corporate assets and disregarded corporate formalities?

Yes, the Paolicellis are personally liable for West Dixie’s violations of the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Can individual owners of a corporation be held personally liable as alter egos for the corporation’s unfair labor practices under the National Labor Relations Act when they have commingled personal and corporate assets and disregarded corporate formalities?

Conclusion

The case affirms that in the Eleventh Circuit, federal law provides the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex

Legal Rule

Personal liability for a corporation's unfair labor practices under the NLRA is Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing

Legal Analysis

The court's analysis focused on the application of the federal common law Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugia

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • The NLRB has discretion to establish its $50,000 jurisdictional threshold using
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mo

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?