The Northeastern Corporate Institute of Technology (NCIT), a profit-oriented corporation engaged in nuclear research projects, owned and operated an experimental station in a remote region of Alaska. The Alaskan Chemical Disposal Corporation, a subsidiary of NCIT, disposed of all chemical and nuclear waste products produced by NCIT’s experimental station. On a routine disposal route, an Alaskan Chemical Disposal transport convoy collided with a North Coast moving van.

The lead truck in the convoy spilled chemical waste into a lake owned by Kenneth Ridgeway.

Ridgeway sued both NCIT and Alaskan Chemical Disposal. NCIT argued that the disposal of NCIT’s chemical was the sole responsibility of Alaskan Chemical Disposal, which it characterized as an independent contractor. Ridgeway’s attorney, however, had discovered that Alaskan Chemical Disposal had no business other than providing waste disposal services to NCIT. The attorney also discovered that Alaskan Chemical Disposal was listed as a division of NCIT, was financed by NCIT, and shared the same board of directors and officers as NCIT. Moreover, the attorney found out that Alaskan Chemical Disposal was badly undercapitalized. In addition, all decisions in the running of Alaskan Chemical Disposal were made by NCIT. In light of all of this evidence, Ridgeway’s attorney began to suspect that Alaskan Chemical Disposal might have been formed to allow NCIT to escape liability in just this type of situation. Will Ridgeway be allowed to maintain its suit against NCIT? Explain.