North Carolina, Supreme Court, Raleigh : Estes v Hairston, December 1827.

Estes stated that Hairston brought an attachment against him whilst he was on his way with a group of slaves from Virginia to Tennessee. The slaves were detained in Stokes county and their maintenance in the custody of the sheriff cost [dollars] 1,400. In the ensuing case a verdict was found against...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Corporate Author: Adam Matthew Digital (Firm) (digitiser.)
Format: Electronic eBook
Language:English
Series:Slavery, abolition & social justice.
Subjects:
Online Access:Click for online access

MARC

LEADER 00000nam a2200000Mi 4500
001 on1391994719
003 OCoLC
005 20240623213015.0
006 m o d
007 cr ||||||||a||
008 230622s1827 ncu o 000 d eng d
040 |a UKAMD  |b eng  |e rda  |c UKAMD  |d OCLCO 
035 |a (OCoLC)1391994719 
049 |a HCDD 
245 0 0 |a North Carolina, Supreme Court, Raleigh :  |b Estes v Hairston, December 1827. 
264 0 |a Raleigh, North Carolina :  |b North Carolina Supreme Court,  |c 1827. 
300 |a 1 online resource. 
336 |a text  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a computer  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a online resource  |2 rdacarrier 
490 1 |a Slavery, abolition & social justice 
520 |a Estes stated that Hairston brought an attachment against him whilst he was on his way with a group of slaves from Virginia to Tennessee. The slaves were detained in Stokes county and their maintenance in the custody of the sheriff cost [dollars] 1,400. In the ensuing case a verdict was found against Estes for [dollars] 10,000, for which sum, as he was not in his own state, he was unable to obtain security. Estes stated that he had been advised that the verdict against him was unsound and so prayed for a certiorari to be issued for the case to be heard in a higher court. The original contract between Estes and two of his relatives and Robert Hairston, signed in 1818, was for the purchase of a tobacco crop at [dollars] 10 per hundredweight. The assignment of Robert Hairston's interest to Peter Hairston, on a separate document, was dated 1822. The Supreme Court found that the trial judge had erred, as an assignment of a contract to another had to be on the same piece of paper on which the contract had been written. A certiorari was therefore issued for the plaintiff. 
535 1 |a North Carolina State Archives 
542 |f Material sourced from the North Carolina State Archives 
650 7 |a Court records  |2 fast 
650 7 |a Debt  |2 fast 
650 7 |a Plantations  |2 fast 
650 7 |a Sheriffs  |2 fast 
650 7 |a Slave traders  |2 fast 
650 7 |a Tobacco  |2 fast 
651 7 |a North Carolina  |2 fast 
710 2 |a Adam Matthew Digital (Firm),  |e digitiser. 
710 1 |a North Carolina.  |b Division of Archives and History,  |e owner. 
830 0 |a Slavery, abolition & social justice. 
856 4 0 |u https://holycross.idm.oclc.org/login?auth=cas&url=https://www.slavery.amdigital.co.uk/documents/detail/north-carolina-supreme-court-raleigh-estes-v-hairston-december-1827/22177112  |y Click for online access 
903 |a AMD-SLAVERYABOLITIONJUSTICE 
994 |a 92  |b HCD