HODGE

v.

HUFF

Citator

Cited By (34 total)

• Christian v. The United States, 312 F.2d 418 (Ct. Cl. 1963)
  …sent action in the name of the plaintiff, the nominal prime contractor, because they, having no privity of contract with the Government, cannot sue the Government in their own names. Severin v. United States, 99 Ct.Cl. 435, 442 (1943), cert. denied, 322 U.S. 733, 64 S.Ct. 1045, 88 L.Ed. 1587 (1944). Generally, when a prime contractor’s action against the Government is based on losses allegedly sustained by subcontractors, the possibility of recovery depends not only upon proof that the subcontractors actua…
• United States ex rel. Jacob Wissenfeld v. Wilkins, 281 F.2d 707 (2d Cir. 1960)
  …ntation of which requires an ability to organize factual data or to call witnesses and elicit testimony in a logical fashion it is much the better practice to assign counsel. Hodge v. Huff, 78 U.S.App.D.C. 329, 140 F. 2d 686, certiorari denied 1944, 322 U.S. 733, 64 S.Ct. 946, 88 L.Ed. 1567; Ex parte Rosier, 1942, 76 U.S.App.D.C. 214, 133 F. 2d 316, 333; cf. Thomas v. United States, 6 Cir., 1954, 217 F. 2d 494. As we have ourselves implicitly recognized, rarely will a prisoner have sufficient ability or tra…
• Blount Bros. Constr. Co. v. The United States, 346 F.2d 962 (Ct. Cl. 1965)
  …court can decide the legal issue and thus dispose of the case, at the present stage.4 II. Defendant urges that the plaintiff, the prime contractor, is barred by the doctrine of Severin v. United States, 99 Ct.Cl. 435, 442-444 (1943), cert. denied, 322 U.S. 733, 64 S.Ct. 1045, 88 L.Ed. 1567 (1944), from recovering on behalf of its subcontractor (Whittington & Brown Co., Inc.) which actually did the work. The argument is that the subcontract exculpated the plaintiff from all [*965] liability on this score.…