Want this question answered?
Dred Scott V. Sanford
Because the court ruled that Dred Scott was African American and therefore had no right to sue
The name of the slave that sued for his freedom in the Dred Scott vs Sandford case, was Dred Scott. He tried unsuccessfully to sue for the freedom of himself, his wife and their two daughters.
He was taken to the free state of Illinois and lived there for many years.
Dred Scott sued for his freedom in the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott v. Sandford case. The court ruled against Scott, declaring that African Americans were not citizens and therefore could not sue in federal court. This decision further inflamed tensions over slavery in the United States.
Dred Scott sued his master for his freedom on the grounds that he had been living on free soil for several years. The Supreme Court decided that he was not a citizen and had no legal right to sue.
Dred Scott V. Sanford
If you mean Dred Scott, yes he did, while he was on Northern soil, where his master had unwisely taken him. It is not known why he did not sue for his freedom while he had the chance. But when he came back to the South, it was more difficult. The local authorities took advantage of the confused situation and denied him his freedom - a decision ratified by the Supreme Court.
Dred Scott
Because the court ruled that Dred Scott was African American and therefore had no right to sue
missouri, and the supreme court
dred scott
The name of the slave that sued for his freedom in the Dred Scott vs Sandford case, was Dred Scott. He tried unsuccessfully to sue for the freedom of himself, his wife and their two daughters.
they said that he was a piece of property and could not sue for his freedom
He was taken to the free state of Illinois and lived there for many years.
supreme court said that slaves couldn't sue for freedom because the were property
Dred Scott sued his owner Peter Blow for his freedom. He had basis for the suit because of his extended stay in states where slavery was prohibited.