Jim Rea is (IOM) right on target with his analysis of the protections offered 
by limited liability, whether as a limited-liability organization per se or 
as a corporation.  There's a catch, of course -- to which he also alluded in 
passing.  That's the "personal guarantee" to which he referred.
That's just what creditors will call for in virtually any case.  There's the 
possibility, of course, that a vendor/supplier, accustomed to waiting -- say 
-- 30 days or so for payment won't make any such request.  Then, if the order 
was clearly by the limited-liability entity, employees of such an entity are 
not liable.  Only the entity or corporation is liable.  But you might 
reasonably expect such a state to be disputed.  
A court might be told, for example, that you acted deceptively in holding 
that your purchase was actually by the corporation when it really was for 
personal goods of no inherent interest to a business.  There are surely 
dozens of other claims that could be made -- leaving it up to the court to 
determine their validity.  Or yours.  
Q.E.D., it's substantially less simple than it seems on the surface.
In passing, you might find it somewhat interesting that the same individuals 
who find the creation of this "artificial person" is important seem often to 
be the individuals who weep at that "artificial person" being expected to pay 
his own taxes.  "Oh, NO," they say.  "That's actually MY money they're 
taxing. They're taxing me twice -- once as myself and once as my 
rporation."
And they can't see the oxymoronic nature of their position.  Ah, well...
                                                                   --ed
ed.nelson@syslink.mcs.com
--- TBBS v2.1/NM
---------------