Si mensor falsum modum dixerit
(Where a Surveyor Makes a False Report With Reference to Measurements.)
1 Ulpianus libro vicensimo quarto ad edictum. Adversus mensorem agrorum praetor in factum actionem proposuit. a quo falli nos non oportet: nam interest nostra, ne fallamur in modi renuntiatione, si forte vel de finibus contentio sit vel emptor scire velit vel venditor, cuius modi ager veneat. ideo autem hanc actionem proposuit, quia non crediderunt veteres inter talem personam locationem et conductionem esse, sed magis operam beneficii loco praeberi et id quod datur ei, ad remunerandum dari et inde honorarium appellari: si autem ex locato conducto fuerit actum, dicendum erit nec tenere intentionem. 1Haec actio dolum malum dumtaxat exigit: visum est enim satis abundeque coerceri mensorem, si dolus malus solus conveniatur eius hominis, qui civiliter obligatus non est. proinde si imperite versatus est, sibi imputare debet qui eum adhibuit: sed et si neglegenter, aeque mensor securus erit: lata culpa plane dolo comparabitur. sed et si mercedem accepit, non omnem culpam eum praestare propter verba edicti: utique enim scit praetor et mercede eos intervenire. 2Is autem tenetur hac actione qui renuntiavit: sed renuntiasse et eum accipere debemus, qui per alium renuntiavit
1 Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XXIV. The Prætor grants an action in factum against a surveyor of land, as we must not be deceived by him, since we are interested in obtaining a correct report of measurements; where, for example, a controversy has arisen with respect to boundaries, or the purchaser or the vendor desires to ascertain the size of the tract of land to be sold. He grants this action for the reason that the ancient authorities did not consider the contract made with a person of this kind to be one of leasing and hiring, but rather that his services were donated as a favor, and hence what was given to him by way of remuneration was designated honorary; but if an action is brought for leasing and hiring, it must be said that it is brought to no purpose. 1This action only requires the existence of positive malice. For it was held that the surveyor will be thoroughly restrained if he can only be sued on the ground of positive malice, since he is not civilly liable. Therefore, if he has displayed a want of skill, he who employed him has only himself to blame, but if he was guilty of negligence, he will be equally secure; and it is evident that gross negligence resembles malice. But where he receives compensation, he will, according to the terms of the Edict, be responsible for every kind of negligence; for undoubtedly the Prætor knows that parties of this kind work for pay. 2He only is liable to this action who makes a report; but we must understand that he makes a report who does so through another;
2 Paulus libro vicensimo quinto ad edictum. vel per litteras. 1Sed si ego tibi, cum esses mensor, mandaverim, ut mensuram agri ageres et tu id Titio delegaveris et ille dolo malo quid in ea re fecerit, tu teneberis, quia dolo malo versatus es, qui tali homini credidisti.
2 Paulus, On the Edict, Book XXV. Or in writing. 1If, however, I direct you, a surveyor, to survey my field, and you turn this over to Titius, and he, in the course of the work does something through positive malice, you will be liable; because you have displayed positive malice in trusting such a man.
3 Ulpianus libro vicensimo quarto ad edictum. Si duobus mandavero et ambo dolose fecerint, adversus singulos in solidum agi poterit, sed altero convento, si satisfecerit, in alterum actionem denegari oportebit. 1Competit autem haec actio ei, cuius interfuit falsum modum renuntiatum non esse, hoc est vel emptori vel venditori, cui renuntiatio offuit. 2Pomponius tamen scribit, si emptor plus dederit venditori propter renuntiationem, quia condicere potest quod plus dedit, agi cum mensore non posse: nihil enim emptoris interesse, cum possit condicere: nisi solvendo venditor non fuit: tunc enim mensor tenebitur. 3Sed si venditor maiorem modum tradiderit fraudatus a mensore, consequenter dicit Pomponius non esse actionem adversus mensorem, quia est ex vendito actio adversus emptorem, nisi et hic emptor solvendo non sit. 4Idem Pomponius scribit, si propter iudicium adhibitus mensor fraudaverit me in renuntiatione, teneri eum, si ob hoc de iudicio minus tuli: plane si a iudice adhibitus contra me renuntiaverit dolo malo, dubitat, an teneri mihi debeat? quod magis admittit. 5Hanc actionem heredi similibusque personis dandam Pomponius scribit: sed in heredem similesque personas denegandam ait. 6Servi autem nomine magis noxale quam de peculio competere ait, quamvis civilis actio de peculio competat.
3 Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XXIV. Where I direct two persons to make a survey and both of them are guilty of malice, I can bring suit against them severally for the entire amount; but where one of them, after having been sued, satisfies my claim, an action against the other one must be refused. 1This action can be brought by anyone whose interest it was that a report of false measurement should not be made; that is to say, either by the purchaser or by the vendor, who has been injured by the report. 2Pomponius, however, says that if on account of the report, the purchaser pays the vendor too much, a suit cannot be brought by him against the surveyor, because he has a right of action to recover what has been paid in excess; for it is not the interest of the purchaser to do this, since he has the right of action for recovery, unless the vendor is insolvent; for then the surveyor will be liable. 3Where the vendor, having been deceived by the surveyor, conveys a larger amount of land; Pomponius says, that in compliance with the same rule, no action against the surveyor will lie, because the vendor is entitled to an action on sale against the purchaser, unless the purchaser is not solvent. 4Pomponius also states that where a surveyor is employed on account of a trial, and he defrauds me in his report, he will be liable if, on this account, I obtain less by the judgment. It is clear that, if he was appointed by the court and maliciously makes a report against me, he doubts whether I have a right to hold him liable, nevertheless, he rather thinks I have. 5Pomponius says that this action should be granted to the heir and to other persons of the same kind, but that it should be refused against the heir and persons of that description. 6He says that the action is noxal rather than De peculio when brought with reference to a slave, although a civil action De peculio may be available.
4 Paulus libro vicensimo quinto ad edictum. Haec actio perpetua est, quia initium rei non ad circumscriptionem, sed a suscepto negotio originem accipit.
4 Paulus, On the Edict, Book XXV. This action is a perpetual one, for the cause derives its origin not from the time when the bad faith began, but from the date when the business was undertaken.
5 Ulpianus libro vicensimo quarto ad edictum. Si mensor non falsum modum renuntiaverit, sed traxerit renuntiationem et ob hoc evenerit ut venditor liberetur, qui adsignaturum se modum intra certum diem promisit, haec actio locum non habet: sed nec dari utilem debere Pomponius ait. erit ergo ad actionem de dolo decurrendum. 1Si, cum falsus modus renuntiatus esset, emptor cum venditore ex empto egisset, agere poterit etiam cum mensore: sed si nihil eius interest, condemnari mensorem non oportet. quod si non de toto modo qui deerat cum venditore egerit, sed de minore, consequenter scribit Pomponius de residuo cum mensore agi posse. 2Hoc iudicium latius praetor porrexit: nam et si cuius alterius rei mensuram falsam renuntiavisse dicetur, haec actio competit. proinde si in aedificii mensura fefellit vel in frumenti vel in vini,
5 Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XXIV. Where the surveyor does not make a false report of the measurement, but delays the report, and the result is that the vendor is released after promising to convey the property within a specified time, this action cannot be brought; and Pomponius says that an equitable action should not be granted, and therefore recourse must be had to an action based on fraud. 1If a false report is made, and the purchaser sues the vendor on his contract, he can also sue the surveyor, but if he had no interest in doing this, judgment will not be rendered against the surveyor. If he does not sue the vendor for the entire amount which is lacking, but for a smaller amount; Pomponius says, and very properly, that suit can be brought against the surveyor for the remainder. 2The Prætor extended the scope of this action still further; for where there is a false statement made of the measure of anything else, this action is available; hence, where a party deceives his employer in the measurement of a building or in that of grain or wine;
6 Paulus libro vicensimo quarto ad edictum. sive de itineris latitudine sive de servitute immittendi proiciendique quaeratur, sive aream vel tignum vel lapidem metiendo mentitus fuerit
6 Paulus, On the Edict, Book XXIV. Or with reference to the breadth of a pathway, or as to a servitude calling for the insertion of timbers, or a projecting roof, when inquiry is made for this purpose, or where the measurement of a court-yard or of materials or stone is taken, and a false report given;
7 Ulpianus libro vicensimo quarto ad edictum. vel cuius alterius rei, tenebitur. 1Et si mensor machinarius fefellerit, haec actio dabitur. 2Nec non illud quoque Pomponius dicit etiam in eum, qui mensor non fuit, fefellit tamen in modo, competere hanc actionem. 3Hoc exemplo etiam adversus architectum actio dari debet qui fefellit: nam et divus Severus adversus architectum et redemptorem actiones dandas decreverit. 4Ego etiam adversus tabularium puto actiones dandas, qui in computatione fefellit.
7 Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XXIV. Or where the dimensions of anything else is falsely stated, he will be liable. 1This action will be granted where the surveyor makes a false measurement by means of instruments. 2Pomponius also states that anyone is entitled to this action against someone who is not a surveyor but was guilty of deceit in measurement. 3In the same manner the action should be granted against an architect who has been guilty of deceit; for the Divine Severus decreed that action should be granted against an architect or a contractor. 4I, myself, think that an action should be granted also against an accountant who designedly makes a false calculation.