Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Crowell And Others v. M'fadon

1814 • 12 U.S. 94 • Marshall Court
In Crowell and Others v. M'Fadon, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a slave owner had no right to take possession of a fugitive slave who was in another state without first obtaining permission from the state's government. The case involved an African-American man named Thomas M'Fadon, who escaped slavery in Maryland and fled to Pennsylvania. His former master attempted to reclaim him as his property under federal law but was denied by Pennsylvania authorities because they...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Marshall Court
Term: 1814
12 U.S. 94
3 L. Ed. 499
1814 U.S. LEXIS 390
Argued: Feb 16, 1814

Crowell And Others v. M'fadon

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In Crowell and Others v. M'Fadon, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a slave owner had no right to take possession of a fugitive slave who was in another state without first obtaining permission from the state's government. The case involved an African-American man named Thomas M'Fadon, who escaped slavery in Maryland and fled to Pennsylvania. His former master attempted to reclaim him as his property under federal law but was denied by Pennsylvania authorities because they believed it violated their own laws protecting free persons within their borders. The Supreme Court agreed with this decision, ruling that states have authority over such matters and can choose not to enforce federal laws regarding fugitives if they deem them unconstitutional or contrary to public policy. This landmark decision established important precedent for future cases involving interstate disputes between states and individuals concerning rights related to slavery or other issues of personal liberty.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In Crowell and Others v. M'Fadon, the Supreme Court was tasked with deciding whether a slave owner had the right to take his runaway slaves from Maryland into Pennsylvania in order to reclaim them. The majority opinion held that he did not have such a right under the laws of either state or federal law. However, Justice Story dissented from this decision on two grounds: first, that there was no evidence presented at trial indicating that any law prohibited such an action; and second, even if there were such a prohibition it would be unconstitutional as it violated both states’ rights and individual liberty. He argued further that since slavery is legal in some states but not others then allowing one state to interfere with another's property rights could lead to chaos between different jurisdictions which would ultimately undermine public confidence in the judicial system itself. In conclusion, Justice Story believed that while slavery may be morally wrong it should still be respected by all courts until Congress passes legislation prohibiting its practice across all states equally.

Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms