Marie Louise v. Marot

The ruling was cited as precedent to the 1856 landmark Dred Scott v. Sandford case heard by the US Supreme Court.

Supreme Court Justice John McLean cited the precedent in his dissent of the majority ruling.

[2] In 1835, Josephine Louise, a slave, was transported by the defendant Marot from Louisiana to France, a country in which slavery was not tolerated.

The judge delivered instructions to the jury as follows: That if the plaintiff's daughter, Josephine, was taken by the person claiming her services as a slave to a foreign country, where slavery does not exist, and is not tolerated, and by the laws of which such slave would be entitled to her liberty, for the purpose of residence, even temporarily, that is, for any other purpose than mere passage through such country, and perhaps even then, the person so taken to such country would become free, and that freedom once impressed upon an individual was indelible; and the status, or condition in society of such party could not be changed.It is for the jury to decide the fact, whether the plaintiff's daughter, Josephine, was taken to France on a mere passage through the country, or for the purpose of temporary residence.

Presiding Judge George Mathews, Jr., writing for a unanimous court, affirmed the judgment of the district court in a single paragraph, holding that Josephine Louise was free and could not be re-enslaved: This fact [concerning the nature of French law] was submitted to the consideration of the last jury, who tried the cause under a charge of the judge, which we consider to be correct, and was found in favor of the party whose liberty is claimed.