Joseph J. Savory seeks to prevent the sale of his slave. By the judgment of a previous suit, William Shea had Savory's thirty-year-old mulatto slave named Jane seized by Sheriff Theodore Blanchard. Savory argues that the seizure was unjust because, in the first place, the judgment was rendered by default "and without any evidence having been adduced or made" before the court of any "indebtedness" to Shea. Second, Savory believes that Blanchard "set at naught the provisions of law which give the Defendant the right to 'point out to the sheriff what property he wishes to have seized and sold.'" Finally, Savory argues, Shea and Blanchard "have violated the common law and policy of civilized society by attempting to wrong and injure your petitioner at a time when the Law ought to be silent" because "our common Country is involved in a National War, a war of independence, a war which involves the very Existence of our Nation and of Society as it is now organized, and nothing should be countenanced or permitted by the State Authorities" that are "calculated to divide our people or to impair their united strength and Energy to resist the foreign invaders." In consequence of these arguments, Savory prays for a writ of injunction against the sale of Jane.
Result: Granted.
Or you may view all people.
Repository: Iberville Parish Courthouse, Plaquemine, Louisiana
