“three distinct, but not necessarily inconsistent tests” for determining a corporation’s principal place of business: (1) the “nerve center” test, which searches for the location from which the corporation’s activities are controlled and directed; (2) the “center of corporate activity” test, which searches for the location of the corporation’s day-to-day management; and (3) the “locus of the operations of the corporation” test, which searches for the location of the corporation’s actual physical operations. Topp v. CompAir Inc., 814 F.2d 830, 834 (1st Cir.1987). While we have not had occasion to apply these tests to a general partnership whose partners are corporate identity of subsidiary where evidence showed that it operated independently from its parent); Topp, 814 F.2d at 833 (<HOLDING>); Lugo-Vina, 574 F.2d at 43 (recognizing
holding that a parent company was not liable for aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary duty by its subsidiary because the parent company was not a stranger to the business relationship between its subsidiary and the plaintiff giving rise to and underpinning the contract recognizing separate corporate identity of subsidiary holding company despite evidence that it could not act without the express permission of its parent and that its sole function was to serve as financial conduit for parent recognizing separate corporate identity of parent despite evidence that subsidiary performed the lions share of the film production for the parent recognizing separate corporate identity of parent despite evidence that parent consolidated its profits and losses with that of its whollyowned subsidiary in presenting parents financial reports to shareholders that subsidiary was considered a division of parent and that subsidiary accounted for 60 of parents and subsidiarys combined operations recognizing separate corporate identity of parent despite evidence that parent was alterego of its subsidiary and was being sued for acts of its subsidiary