What is meant by “piercing the corporate veil?”
On what basis did the majority decide not to pierce the corporate veil in this case?
How does the dissent respond?
What is required for a “willful” violation of the OSH Act’s general duty clause?
For a “serious” violation? Why does the majority uphold the Commission’s rule that the violation in this case was not willful?
On what basis would the dissent have reversed the Commission’s holding?
