{
  "id": 8727802,
  "name": "Gray vs. Saffold's Administrators",
  "name_abbreviation": "Gray v. Saffold's Administrators",
  "decision_date": "1844-07",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "637",
  "last_page": "638",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "5 Ark. 637"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 127,
    "char_count": 1512,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.52,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 8.138363859351185e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4732918791790564
    },
    "sha256": "1fb804f643706bfcb643c241d74455b4576baa9f3cf1be5889e20935cb900b37",
    "simhash": "1:f3b2a4e05c1634fe",
    "word_count": 252
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:02:08.123138+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Gray vs. Saffold\u2019s Administrators."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "By the court,\nLacy J.\nThe main question in this case is whether an administrator of an intestate can maintain an action for the recovery of slaves against the heir. It is certain he cannot, as a general principle; and so it has been determined in Hill\u2019s administrators vs. Mitchell. The law casts the decent of slaves upon the heir. Under certain circumstances they are made assets sub modo in the hands of the administrator for the payment of debts. If these circumstances were shown, whether or not he could maintain the action for the recovery of the possession, is a question upon which we express no opinion, as that point does not arise upon the record. Judgment reversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Lacy J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "The case was argued here by Ashley & Watkins, Pike & Baldwin, for plaintiff in error, and Fowler & Borden, contra."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Gray vs. Saffold\u2019s Administrators.\nAn administrator can maintain no action against an heir for the recovery of slaves o\u00ed the intestate by virtue only of his general.right as administrator.\nThis was an action of replevin, determined in the Pulaski circuit court, in September, 1842, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the circuit judges. Saffold\u2019s administrators sued Gray, one of the heirs, for a negro belonging to the intestate. Judgment for plaintiffs exceptions, setting oat the evidence and instructions, in error. One of the instructions asked and refused was, that the plaintiffs could not maintain the action, unless it was necessary they should have possession in order to pay the debts of the estate.\nThe case was argued here by Ashley & Watkins, Pike & Baldwin, for plaintiff in error, and Fowler & Borden, contra."
  },
  "file_name": "0637-01",
  "first_page_order": 637,
  "last_page_order": 638
}