Nelson v. Lillard
Nelson v. Lillard
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court.
Plaintiff alleges, that on the 4th March, 1837, he purchased of the defendant five slaves, named Willis, Cynthia, Solomon, Frank aud Moses, for the sum of five thousand dollars,
The record shows,.that about two weeks after the sale, the defendant took back the slave Willis, for which he gave plaintiff a note of eight hundred and eighty dollars, including therein the interest of one year, and that the note of five thousand five hundied dollars is not in defendant’s possession, but has been transferred to a third person. The sale of the five slaves, made in a lump for five thousand dollars, states that the vendor warrants (Item sound in body, except the boy Solomon, and sound in mind, except the boy Willis, and although the plaintiff attempted to prove, by the oath of one of the defendants, that Solomon liad been warranted as sound in body in every respect, other than having a club foot; his answer to the interrogatories show, that, the warranty was limited, ns stated in the sale.
Several physicians were examined, and from the mass of testimony found in (lie record, it is proven that, the slave Solomon had the seeds of consumption, pethaps eight months, previous to the physicians having first seen him, which was in the latter part of the summer of 1837 ; that said physician saw him alarmingly ill, and that the disease made its appearance, a week or ten days after delivery. That Moses died on the first of June, of epilepsy, or of a slioke of t lie sun ; andihat he had had an attack in the middle of April, that the symptoms might have been epilepsy, or a stroke of the sun, and that the negro was found once speechless and foaming at the month, lying on the ground, &c., &e. That Cynthia died in September, complained of her hip, and was lame from ¡i week or ten days after Nelson bought, her until her death, &c., &c.; and that Frank is ..alive, able to work moderately, but lias been sick four months in ilie summer, &t\, &c. It. is also shown that plaintiff was in the habit of treating his slaves kindly, that they were generally well clothed and well fed, and that the defendant, Lillard, admitted at one time, that “ the slaves sold were an old, no account set of negroes, and if he had known what kind they were, they never should have come out. from Virginia.”
From the general evidence of the case, ii seems to us that the jury were authorized to come to the conclusion that the slaves, Moses and Cynthia, were affected with redhibitory defects at the time of the sale ; and liad they limited their verdict. to rescinding the sale with regard to the said two slaves, we should have felt no hesitation in maintaining their verdict, which, although some parts of the evidence appears contradictory, cannot be said, as to the said slaves, to be clearly erroneous. But, the jury have rescinded the sale also, with regard to the slaves Solomon and Frank, and in this, we think, they erred. The boy Solomon was not warranted as sound in body ; this warranty was, on the contrary, specially excluded from the sale, and we consider that as a solemn declaration that said slave was unsound, which, in the sense of (he expression, indicates that he was sickly, and subject to diseases (lien unknown : Louisiana Code, art. 2498; 1 Martin, N. S., 1. This was enough to induce the plaintiff not to buy him. With regard to the negro Frank, we think the plaintiff lias not made out his case, as he has furnished no evidence of this slave being afflicted with a redhibitory disease at the time of the sale, although he proved that he was sick some time after the sale; and the evidence adduced does not, in our opinion, justify the rescission of the sale as to him. The verdict of the jury must, therefore, be set, aside, as to (lie slaves Solomon and Frank.
We do not consider the defendant entitled to any damages for the loss of Moses and Cynthia, as those slaves were sick from the time they were delivered, and died a short time after the sale ; and our judgment must be in favor of the plaintiff, only for the reimbursement of the prices of Moses and Cynthia, with one year’s interest on the amount, aL the rate of ten per cent.
It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the judgment of the District Court be annulled, avoided and reversed ; that the verdict of the jury be set aside, as to the rescission of the slaves Solomon and Frank, and as to the damages allowed to the defendant; and that the plaintiff do
Reference
- Full Case Name
- NELSON v. LILLARD
- Status
- Published