SMITH-DOUGLASS CO., INC.

v.

UNITED STATES; AND UNITED STATES V. SMITH-DOUGLASS CO., INC.

Citator

Cited By

• Produce Factors Corp. v. The United States, 467 F.2d 1343 (Ct. Cl. 1972)
  …ainst the Government. R.S. §§ 3477, 3737 (1875) (now 31 U.S.C. § 203, 41 U.S.C. § 15). One of the major purposes of this prohibition was stated by the court in Pittman v. United States, 116 F.Supp. 576, 580, 127 Ct.Cl. 173, 180 (1953), cert. denied, 348 U.S. 815, 75 S.Ct. 23, 99 L.Ed. 642 (1954): * * * The Anti-Assignment statute was enacted for the purpose of preventing third parties, with whom the Government was not in privity, from acquiring an enforceable interest in a claim against it. * * * Conseque…
• Kearney v. United States, 285 F.2d 797 (Ct. Cl. 1961)
  …here asserted was a nullity under the provisions of the Anti-Assignment Act, 10 Stat. 170, as amended, 31 U.S.C.A. § 203. This conclusion follows from our decision in Pittman v. United States, 116 F.Supp. 576, 127 Ct.Cl. 173, certiorari denied 1954, 348 U.S. 815, 75 S.Ct. 23, 99 L.Ed. 642. The statute reads: “All transfers and assignments made of any claim upon the United States, or of any part or share thereof, or interest therein, whether absolute or conditional, and whatever may be the consideration th…
• McDONNELL Aircraft Corp. v. United States, 342 F.2d 943 (8th Cir. 1965)
  …urposes has been preserved. Holmes Projector Co. v. United States, 105 F. Supp. 690, 123 Ct.Cl. 278 (1952) cert. denied 344 U.S. 912, 73 S.Ct. 334, 97 L.Ed. 703; Junior Toy Corp. v. United States, 116 F.Supp. 730, 126 Ct.Cl. 681 (1953), cert. denied 348 U.S. 815, 75 S.Ct. 26, 99 L.Ed. 643; National Forge & Ordnance Co. v. United States, 151 F.Supp. 937, 939, 139 Ct.Cl. 204 (1957); Continental Foundry & Machine Co. v. United States, 159 F.Supp. 608, 612, 141 Ct.Cl. 604 (1958). 5. The 1951 renegotiation was…