Smith v. McDowell
Smith v. McDowell
Opinion of the Court
The defendant is appellant from a judgment cancelling the sale of a slave made by him to the plaintiff, and condemning him to the reimbursement of the price, on the ground of the slave being addicted to running away, and not having been, at the time of the sale, more than two months in the State. The sale took place on the 12th of March, 1840 ; and the slave ran away early in April following, was caught, but ran away again, being the second time within the space of six weeks. No evidence was given of his having run away before the sale to the plaintiff. Defendant relied on the act of the General Assembly of 1834, which provides that the plaintiff, in a redhibitory action, shall not be bound to prove that the habit of running away existed before the date of the sale, whenever said vice shall have been discovered within two months thereafter. This act, however, does not extend to slaves, who have been more than eight months in this State.
Judgment affirmed.
The act of 2d January, 1334, provides — •
Sect. 3. That the buyer of a slave, who institutes a redhibitory action on the ground that such slave is a runaway or thief, shall not be bound to prove that such vice existed before the date of the sale, whenever said vice shall have been discovered within two months after the sale, and no renunciation of this privilege shall be valid ; provided, however, that where unusual punishments have been inflicted, this legal presumption in favor of the buyer shall cease ; and provided, also, that if any redhibitory, bodily or mental, maladies, discover themselves within fifteen days after the sale, they shall be presumed to have existed on the day thereof, any law to the contrary notwithstanding ; and provided, also, that the provisions of this section shall not apply to slaves who have been more than eight months in this State.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Edward Smith v. Robert McDowell
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published