Smoot v. Fitzhugh
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Circuit court of Mobile. Detinue for a slave — tried by Pickens, X Verdict and judgment for plaintiff. This case is, in most of its features, the same as the case of Swift vs. Fitzhugh, previously decided — except that in" this case, the slaves sued for were purchased by the plaintiff in error, of John II. Maguire, on the fourteenth of February, eighteen hundred and thirty-four.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit court of Mobile. Detinue for a slave — tried by Pickens, X Verdict and judgment for plaintiff. This case is, in most of its features, the same as the case of Swift vs. Fitzhugh, previously decided — except that in" this case, the slaves sued for were purchased by the plaintiff in error, of John II. Maguire, on the fourteenth of February, eighteen hundred and thirty-four. In this case also, in addition to the evidence produced in the court below, by the defendaut in error, in the case of Swift vs. Fitzhugh, the defendant in error proved by a witness, that he had read the…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
The principles decided in the case of Swift vs. Fitzhugh, at the present term, are decisive of this case.
The plaintiff in this case, is a purchaser of the slaves in controversy; in that, he was a hirer; but as both are legal titles, differing only in degree, the same principles must govern both. The quantity of the interest cannot enter into the decision of the question. In both cases the parties must derive their title through John H. Ma-guire, and can not be in a better situation than he would be, were he the person asserting title.
The reading to the jury, the act of the Virginia…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1883