to pierce the corporate veil—and I’m citing out of the Anderson v. Stewart case—the court will disregard the corporate form when the corporate form has been illegally abused to the injury of a third party.” Appellants do not disagree with that statement; however, they assert that there is authority from Arkansas appellate court decisions that supports the piercing of the veil in the absence of an illegal or fraudulent act where the actions by the corporation or corporate officer perpetrate an injustice on the plaintiff. See McMickle v. Griffin, 369 Ark. 318, 254 S.W.3d 729 (2007); Ark. Bank & Trust Co. v. Douglass, 318 Ark. 457, 885 S.W.2d 863 (1994); Woodyard v. Ark. Diversified Ins. Co., 268 Ark. 94, 594 S.W.2d 13 (1980); Winchel v. Craig, 55 Ark. App. 373, 934 S.W.2d 946 (1996) (<HOLDING>). While the word “fraud” appears in some cases
holding that courts will ignore the corporate form where fairness demands holding that a fraudulent transfer claim against a corporate debtors control person belongs to the corporate debtor not to specific creditors holding that grand jury testimony of officer and inhouse counsel for corporate defendant was properly admitted as admission against the corporate defendant holding that the general corporate laws are incorporated into the corporate charter holding that a corporate officer signing a contract in his corporate capacity is generally not liable for damages under the contract