Question: "Scott v. Emerson" was part of of a case in which year ?
Context: Dred Scott (c. 1799 – September 17, 1858) was an enslaved African American man in the United States who unsuccessfully sued for his freedom and that of his wife and their two daughters in the "Dred Scott v. Sandford" case of 1857, popularly known as the "Dred Scott Decision".  Scott claimed that he and his wife should be granted their freedom because they had lived in Illinois and the Wisconsin Territory for four years, where slavery was illegal.  The United States Supreme Court decided 7–2 against Scott, finding that neither he nor any other person of African ancestry could claim citizenship in the United States, and therefore Scott could not bring suit in federal court under diversity of citizenship rules.  Moreover, Scott's temporary residence outside Missouri did not bring about his emancipation under the Missouri Compromise, which the court ruled unconstitutional as it would "improperly deprive Scott's owner of his legal property". William Scott (June 7, 1804 – 1862) was an American lawyer and judge who served on the Supreme Court of Missouri from 1841 to 1849 and from 1851 to 1862.  He also served on the Jefferson City Circuit Court.  Justice Scott was the author of the majority opinion in "Scott v. Emerson", 15 Missouri 572 (1852), which was part of the "Dred Scott v. Sandford" case.  Scott's opinion, which overturned well-established precedent in Missouri, set the stage for Dred Scott's case in the Supreme Court. Hugh A. Garland (June 1, 1805 – October 14, 1854) was an American slaveholder, lawyer and politician.  He served in the Virginia House of Delegates.  He was a staunch supporter of slavery in the United States, and he led the defense for Dred Scott's owner, John F. A. Sanford, in the notorious case of Dred Scott v. Sandford, but died two years before the case was argued in court. Scott v. Illinois, 440 U.S. 367 (1979), was a case heard by the Supreme Court of the United States.  In "Scott", the Court decided whether the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments required Illinois to provide Scott with trial counsel. Rachel v. Walker (1834) was a "freedom suit" filed by Rachel, an African-American slave, in the St. Louis Circuit Court.  She petitioned for her freedom and that of her son James (John) Henry from William Walker (a slave trader), based on having been held illegally as a slave in the free territory of Michigan by a previous master, an Army officer.  Her case was appealed to the Supreme Court of Missouri, where she won.  The court ruled that an Army officer forfeited his slave if he took the person to territory where slavery is prohibited.  This ruling was cited as precedent in 1856 in the famous "Dred Scott v. Sandford" case before the Supreme Court of the United States. Samuel Mansfield Bay (June 1, 1810 – May 29, 1849) was an American lawyer who represented Dred Scott in the 1847 Scott v. Emerson case.  Bay served in the Missouri Legislature and was appointed as Missouri attorney-general from 1839 to 1845. American Insurance Company v. 356 Bales of Cotton, 26 U.S. 511 (1828) , was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States.  The case involved the validity of a local court established by Congress in the Florida Territory whose judges lacked life tenure, as mandated by Article III of the Constitution.  Chief Justice John Marshall upheld the courts on the basis of Congress's broad power to enact local laws for territories under Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the Constitution.  The case was later discussed in "Dred Scott v. Sandford", where Chief Justice Roger Taney distinguished it in holding that Congress could not ban slavery within a territory. Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857) , also known simply as the Dred Scott case, was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court on US labor law and constitutional law.  It held that "a negro, whose ancestors were imported into [the U.S.], and sold as slaves", whether enslaved or free, could not be an American citizen and therefore had no standing to sue in federal court, and that the federal government had no power to regulate slavery in the federal territories acquired after the creation of the United States.  Dred Scott, an enslaved man of "the negro African race" who had been taken by his owners to free states and territories, attempted to sue for his freedom.  In a 7–2 decision written by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the court denied Scott's request.  The decision was only the second time that the Supreme Court had ruled an Act of Congress to be unconstitutional. Scott v. Shepherd 96 Eng.  Rep. 525 (K.B. 1773), commonly known as "the famous Squib Case," is an important English tort law case on remoteness and the principle of "novus actus interveniens" as it related to the division between trespass and case. Harriet Robinson Scott was an African American slave woman who, despite adversity, fought for her freedom alongside her husband Dred Scott in the popular court case Scott v Sanford.
Answer: 1857