Case Name: Widow J. Lombard v. Charles A. Jacobs
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1851-04
Citations: 6 La. Ann. 396
Docket Number: 
Parties: Widow J. Lombard v. Charles A. Jacobs.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 6
Pages: 396–397

Head Matter:
Widow J. Lombard v. Charles A. Jacobs.
Where a slave was unsound, and so unlit for the ordinary uses for which slaves are purchased, it could not he supposed a party would have purchased him if he had known his true condition; the sale should he annulled, and judgment given for the price, with interest from the date of the sale. C. C. 2496,2451.
APPEAL from the Second District Court of New Orleans, Lea, J.
The judgment of the district court was as follows: “This suit is brought for the rescission of the sale of a slave sold by defendant to plaintiff, and for the reimbursement of the price, on the ground that said slave was sold as a good axeman, and sound in health; whereas, petitioner alleges that he was not a good axeman, was feeble in body, and somewhat idiotic, at least at intervals. The answer admits the sale for the price alleged, viz. $675; but denies generally all the other allegations in said petition contained. The bill of sale contains the usual guarantee against the vices and maladies prescribed by law; no reference is made to the capacity of said slave as a wood chopper. The only question then is, whether the evidence establishes facts sufficient to justify a rescission of the sale, under the guarantees established by law.
“The evidence on this point is somewhat contradictory. I am convinced, however, that the slave was at the time of the sale, and long anterior thereto, 'afflicted with a chronic nervous malady, (the precise nature or cause of which it is impossible to determine,) affecting both mind and.body to such an extent as 'to render him utterly worthless; that this disease produced great bodily weak ness and periodical imbecility; that he was unsound at the time of the sale, and so unfit for the ordinary uses for which slaves are purchased, that it cannot be supposed that the plaintiff would have purchased him had- he known his true condition. See Civil Code, 2496, 2451. Also, 2d Ann. 67. The sale was made on the 12th February, 1850, for the price of $675.
“The court having duly considered this case, for the reasons assigned in the written opinion of the court this day delivered, and on file, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed, that there be judgment in favor of the plaintiff, Azclie Zeringue, (widow Lombard) and against the defendant, Charles A. Jacobs, decreeing, 1st. That the sale of the negro man named Joe, made by defendant to plaintiff on the 12th of February, 1850, be rescinded and annulled, and said slave restored to defendant. 2d. That said plaintiff' do have and recover of said Charles A. Jacobs, the sum of six hundred and seventy-five dollars, with interest thereon at the rate of five per cent per annum, from the 12th day of February, 1850, till paid; and costs of suit.”
J. Marnier, for plaintiff.
J. S. Halsey, for defendant.

Opinion:
The judgment of the court was pronounced by
Rost, J,
For the reasons given by the district judge, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the judgment of the court below be affirmed, with costs.