Smith, F. W. C. v. Smith
Supreme Court of Louisiana
ArFEAL FROM THE PARISH COURT, FOR THE PARISH AND CITY OF NEW-ORLEANS. This is a suit for freedom. The plaintiff was the slave of the defendant for life, when, in the spring of 1835, the latter ■went to Prance, taking Priscilla with her as her servant.
Read the full summary
ArFEAL FROM THE PARISH COURT, FOR THE PARISH AND CITY OF NEW-ORLEANS. This is a suit for freedom. The plaintiff was the slave of the defendant for life, when, in the spring of 1835, the latter ■went to Prance, taking Priscilla with her as her servant. After residing in Paris some months, Priscilla was sent back by her mistress to Louisiana, in the ship Garonne, and arrived in New-Orleans in November, 1835. She alleges, that, by going to France with the consent of her mistress, she became free, because slavery is not permitted there, and that the moment she landed in that country she became…
1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.
The plaintiff is appellant from a judgment which rejects her claim to her freedom.
She admits she was once the slave of the defendant, who took her to France, and with whom she remained for three or f°ur mont-bs, after which she was sent back to this state.
This case cannot be distinguished from that of Marie Louise, f. w. c., vs. Marot et al., 9 Louisiana Reports, 473. In both cases it was proven that “ there is no slavery permitted jn prance • that, as soon as a slave lands on the French soil, he is free by the mere iact.
The judge of the Parish Court has admitted, that if the (]ecision of…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Miami Corporation v. StateSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1936
- Quaker Realty Co. v. LabasseSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1912
- Dorsey v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1933
- O. D. Jennings & Co. v. MaestriDistrict Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1938
- Whited v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Louisiana · 1963
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.