Ex Parte: In the Matter of Early Boyd, Plaintiff in Error v. William Scott and William Greene was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1850. The plaintiff, Early Boyd, argued that he had been wrongfully arrested and imprisoned for debt without being given due process as required by law. He claimed that his arrest violated both state and federal laws which protected citizens from such arrests without proper legal proceedings first taking place. The defendants argued that they were not liable because they acted on behalf of another party who held a valid judgment against Boyd for an unpaid debt. After hearing arguments from both sides, the court ruled in favor of Boyd stating that even though there may have been a valid judgment against him it did not excuse or justify his wrongful imprisonment since no legal proceedings had taken place prior to his arrest as required by law. This ruling set an important precedent protecting citizens from unlawful arrests based solely on debts owed to other parties without any due process having occurred beforehand

In Ex Parte: In the Matter of Early Boyd, Plaintiff in Error v. William Scott and William Greene, Justice McLean dissented from the majority opinion that a slave could not be sued for damages in an action brought by his master. He argued that slaves were considered property under state law and as such should have been able to sue or be sued like any other piece of personal property. Furthermore, he noted that if a slave was allowed to bring suit against another person then why shouldn't they also be allowed to defend themselves when being sued? He concluded by stating that it would have been more equitable for both parties involved if this case had gone forward with the plaintiff's claim so justice could prevail regardless of race or status.