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

Hickman v. Jones Et Al.

• 1869 • 76 U.S. 197 • Chase Court
Hickman v. Jones et al. was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a party could sue for damages for the wrongful death of a slave. The case was brought by the executor of the estate of a deceased slave, who sought damages from the defendants for the wrongful death of the slave. The Supreme Court held that the executor could not sue for damages, as the slave was considered to be the property of the defendants and not a person with legal rights. The Court...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 Chase Court
Term: 1869
76 U.S. 197
19 L. Ed. 551
1869 U.S. LEXIS 957
Argued: Nov 22, 1869

Hickman v. Jones Et Al.

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

Hickman v. Jones et al. was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a party could sue for damages for the wrongful death of a slave. The case was brought by the executor of the estate of a deceased slave, who sought damages from the defendants for the wrongful death of the slave. The Supreme Court held that the executor could not sue for damages, as the slave was considered to be the property of the defendants and not a person with legal rights. The Court reasoned that the executor had no legal right to sue for damages, as the slave was not a person with legal rights. The Court also held that the executor could not sue for damages on behalf of the slave's heirs, as the slave had no heirs. The Court concluded that the executor could not sue for damages for the wrongful death of the slave. The decision in this case established that slaves were not considered to be persons with legal rights, and that their owners could not be held liable for their wrongful death.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Hickman v. Jones et al., Chief Justice Chase delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority had failed to consider important aspects of the law and precedent when deciding on their ruling. He noted that while it was true that there were some cases where courts could not grant relief, this particular case did not fall into those categories as it involved an action for damages due to breach of contract. Furthermore, he argued that since both parties had agreed upon certain terms and conditions prior to entering into a contract, they should be held accountable for any breaches thereof regardless of whether or not they were aware at the time what those specific terms entailed. Finally, Chief Justice Chase concluded by noting his disagreement with how narrowly defined “special circumstances” had been interpreted by the majority in order to deny relief; instead he believed such situations should be considered on a more individual basis rather than being subject to broad generalizations about all contracts alike.

Opinion written by Justice NHSwayne
Decided: Jan 24, 1870
PDF viewer is not available.
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