United States v. Sensient Colors, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that defendant’s third-party defense was insufficient where it failed to state that the third party was the sole cause of the damage and striking the defense
• noting the reluctance of courts to grant Rule 12(f) motions “out of a concern that they often involve a premature evaluation of a [pleading's] merits”
• striking defendant’s third-party defense because it did not conform with the requirements of section 107(b)(3) but granting defendant leave to properly amend the defense
• addressing defendant’s affirmative defense asserting that it is entitled to an offset for any amounts paid to the Government pursuant to a settlement under CERCLA

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).