Queen v. Neale

3 H. & J. 158
CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland
DecidedDecember 15, 1810
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 3 H. & J. 158 (Queen v. Neale) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Maryland primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Queen v. Neale, 3 H. & J. 158 (Md. 1810).

Opinion

Nicholson, J,

delivered the opinion of the court. A petition for freedom is comprehended within the general terms of suits or actions in the second section of the act of 1804, ch. 55, and the county court, in which the suit is instituted, are bound to transmit the proceedings to the judges of any county court within the district, upon the affidavit of either of the parties competent to jnake an affidavit, or upon such other proper and competent evidence as may be offered in support of the suggestion that an impartial trial cannot be had in the county in which the petition for freedom is depending.

A negro, petitioning for his freedom, is not competent to make such an affidavit — his slavery or freedom being then sub judicc, and if a slave, he is excluded by the act of 1717, ch. 18.

judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Mayor of Baltimore v. Libowitz
149 A. 449 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1930)
Hall v. United States
92 U.S. 27 (Supreme Court, 1876)
Peters v. Van Lear
4 Gill 249 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1846)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
3 H. & J. 158, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/queen-v-neale-md-1810.