1. Schultz argued that even if the corporate veil should be pierced, the $450,000 judgment against him was too much and should be reduced. How might the court have responded to this argument?

2. Suppose that Schultz had turned over the proceeds from the sale of his properties to his corporation, Intra-Med, and used them to pay part or all of GE’s judgment. In this situation, if the funds were insufficient to cover the debt, would the court have pierced the corporate veil to obtain the balance from Schultz personally? Explain.

Thomas] Schultz was the president and sole shareholder/owner of Intra-Med [Services, Inc.], a Kentucky corporation that performed medical diagnostic imaging services, such as MRIs and CT scans. GE [General Electric Healthcare Financial Services, Inc.; General Electric Company; and General Electric Capital Corporation] entered into a contract to lease certain medical equipment to Intra-Med. In 2004, Intra-Med defaulted on the contract by failing to make the required lease payments to GE. On July 8, 2004, GE filed a complaint against Intra-Med in Jefferson Circuit Court. On November 15, 2004, the court entered a judgment on the pleadings in favor of GE for over $4.7 million. GE was able to collect approximately $700,000 of the judgment.