Ad edictum provinciale libri
Ex libro XXVII
Dig. 4,3,39Gaius libro vicensimo septimo ad edictum provinciale. Si te Titio optuleris de ea re quam non possidebas in hoc ut alius usucapiat, et iudicatum solvi satisdederis: quamvis absolutus sis, de dolo malo tamen teneberis: et ita Sabino placet.
Gaius, On the Provincial Edict, Book XXVII. If you offer yourself to Titius with respect to something of which you are not in possession, in order that another may obtain the use of the same; and you give security that the judgment will be complied with, even though you may be released, you will still be liable for fraud; and this was the opinion of Sabinus.
Dig. 36,3,16Gaius libro vicensimo septimo ad edictum provinciale. Si duo eiusdem nominis de legato contendant, utrisque satisdatur: nec onerari heredem, cum possit eosdem fideiussores ad utramque stipulationem adhibere, qui et ipsi non onerantur, cum futurum sit, ut uni tenerentur.
Gaius, On the Provincial Edict, Book XXVII. Where two persons of the same name claim a legacy, security must be given to both of them, but the heir will not be unnecessarily burdened on this account, as he can make the same sureties responsible under both stipulations; and the said sureties are not unnecessarily burdened, since the result will be that they will only be liable under one obligation.
Dig. 46,6,6Gaius libro vicensimo septimo ad edictum provinciale. Servum pupilli stipulari ita necesse est, si pupillus abest aut fari non potest: nam si praesens sit et fari potest, etiamsi eius aetatis erit, ut non intellegat quid agat, tamen propter utilitatem receptum est recte eum stipulari.
Gaius, On the Provincial Edict, Book XXVII. The slave of a minor must stipulate, if the minor is absent, or cannot speak for himself. For if he is present, and can speak for himself, although he may be of such an age that he is incapable of understanding what he is doing; still, on account of the advantage resulting, it has been decided that he can legally stipulate, and act.
Dig. 46,7,7Gaius libro vicensimo septimo ad edictum provinciale. Si ante acceptum iudicium prohibitus fuerit procurator a domino et actor ignorans prohibitum eum esse egerit, an stipulatio committatur? et nihil aliud dici potest quam committi. quod si quis sciens prohibitum esse egerit, Iulianus non putat stipulationem committi: nam ut committatur, non sufficere ait cum ea persona acceptum esse iudicium, quae stipulationi comprehensa est, sed oportere etiam causam personae eandem esse, quae stipulationis interponendae tempore fuit. et ideo si is, qui procurator datus est, heres exstiterit domino atque ita acceperit iudicium sive etiam prohibitus acceperit, non committitur stipulatio: nam et alias responsum esse, si quis absentem defendens satisdederit, deinde, vel procurator ab eo datus vel postquam heres ei extitit, iudicium acceperit, fideiussores non teneri.
Gaius, On the Provincial Edict, Book XXVII. If, before issue is joined, the attorney for the defendant should be forbidden by his client from appearing, and the plaintiff, not knowing that this had been done, should proceed with the case, will the stipulation take effect? Nothing else can be said than that it will take effect. When, however, anyone knowing of the prohibition imposed upon the attorney proceeds to trial, Julianus does not think that the stipulation will become operative. For, in order that it may do so, he says that it is not sufficient for issue to be joined with the person included in the stipulation, but it is necessary that the claim of that person should be the same as it was at the time when the stipulation was entered into. Hence, if he who was appointed attorney appears as the heir of his client, and as such conducts the case, or if he should do this even after he has been forbidden, the stipulation will not become operative. For otherwise, it has been decided that if anyone who is defending an absent person should give security, and afterwards should either be appointed his attorney, or become his heir, and conduct the case, the sureties will not be liable.