Kelley v. Thomas Solvent Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• striking lack of notice defense, holding that “there are no notice requirements applicable to this [section 107] type of action”
• striking defenses asserting lack of compliance with CERCLA, stating that “there are no[ ] procedural prerequisites in CERCLA to commence a cost recovery action”
• striking affirmative defense that liability limited to pro rata share of damages where defendant acted separately from other defendants
• striking affirmative defense that Government failed to name necessary or indispensable parties
• striking a third-party defense that “merely allegefd] the third party ‘in whole or in part’ caused the harm” because “[t]he statute requires a showing that the third party was the sole cause”
• declining to strike a defense that asserted the “plaintiffs damages can be apportioned”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).