Negress Sally Henry, a slave in Virginia, was brought to court by her father and next friend William Henry. The case argued that the plaintiff had been illegally sold as a slave without her consent or knowledge of the sale. The defendant claimed that he had bought Sally from another person who held legal title to her. In its decision, the Supreme Court ruled against Ball on two grounds: firstly, it found that slaves were not considered property under Virginia law; secondly, even if they were considered property under state law at the time of purchase (which was disputed), any such transaction would be void because it violated public policy and natural justice. This ruling set an important precedent for future cases involving slavery in America - namely that no one could legally buy or sell a human being without their consent or knowledge of the transaction taking place.

In the case of Negress Sally Henry, by William Henry, her father and next friend v. Ball, the dissenting opinion argued that a slave owner had no right to take away a child from its mother without due process of law. The majority opinion held that slaves were property and could be treated as such under Virginia state laws; however, Justice Story disagreed with this ruling on the grounds that it violated fundamental principles of justice and morality. He argued that slavery was an abomination against humanity which should not be tolerated in any form or fashion. Furthermore, he maintained that even if slavery was legal in Virginia at the time, it did not give individuals absolute power over their slaves' lives - including taking away children from their mothers without proper justification or cause for doing so. Therefore he concluded his dissent by stating "I cannot but feel deeply impressed with my conviction...that [this] decision is founded upon erroneous views both of natural justice and public policy."