Legal Opinion
United States v. Pretty Products, Inc.
District Court, S.D. Ohio
Decided December 13, 1991No. C-2-91-74PublishedCited by 61 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
KINNEARY, Senior District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court to consider a variety of motions filed by the Plaintiff, United States of America (“United States” or “EPA”), and the Third-Party Defendant, City of Coshocton, Ohio (“City”). The Court will first address the City of Coshocton’s motion to dismiss the Third-Party Complaint filed by Defendants Pretty Products, Inc. (“Pretty Products”) and Lancaster Colony Corp. (“Lancaster”). 1 Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b). Next, the Court will consider the United States’ two motions to strike various affirmative defenses of the Defendant,…
2Cases cited50 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Hishon v. King & SpaldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Wayte v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by61 opinions
- Akzo Coatings, Incorporated, and the O'Brien Corporation v. Aigner Corp.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
- California Department of Toxic Substances Control v. Alco Pacific, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2002
- Clark v. MilamDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · 1993
- City of Emeryville v. The Sherwin-Williams CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- M & M REALTY CO. v. Eberton Terminal Corp.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1997
56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.