Javolenus, Epistles, Book VII. “Let Attius be my heir to the Cornelian Estate, and let the two persons named Titius be my heirs to such-and-such a house.” The persons named Titius will be entitled to half of the estate, and Attius to the remaining half. This opinion is held by Proculus; what do you think of it? The answer is that the opinion of Proculus is correct.

The Same, Epistles, Book VII. Labeo has frequently stated that the slave of a person born after my death can be appointed my heir. The truth of this is readily established, for the reason that a slave forming part of an estate can be appointed an heir before the estate is entered upon, even though at the time of the execution of the will he did not belong to anyone.

Javolenus, Epistles, Book VII. Where the same property has been bequeathed to me to be delivered by both the appointed and the substituted heirs, and they, having relinquished their rights under the will, have possession of the estate by operation of law, the entire legacy is due to me from both of them; still, if I have obtained it from one, I cannot collect it from the other, hence I can proceed against whichever one of them I choose.

The Same, Epistles, Book VII. “I devise to Mævius half of such-and-such a tract of land, I devise to Seius the other half, and I devise the same land to Titius.” If Seius should die, his share will accrue to the other legatees, because the land, having been left separately and by shares, as well as altogether, it is necessary that the part which is without an owner should accrue proportionally to each of the legatees to whom the bequest was separately made. 1An heir having been appointed by me, I charged him with a legacy for the benefit of his wife, as follows, “Let Seius, my heir, pay Titia a sum equal to whatever comes into the hands of Seius, by way of dowry, through Titia.” I ask whether the expenses incurred through legal proceedings instituted with reference to the dowry can be deducted. The answer was there is no doubt, where a bequest was made to a wife as follows: “I charge you, my heir, to give to her an amount equal to what comes into your hands,” that the entire dowry will be due to the woman, without any deduction of expenses. But the same rule that applies to the will of a husband who returns her dowry to his wife should not be observed with reference to the will of a stranger; for the words, “What comes into your hands,” are to be interpreted as a limiting clause; but where a man leaves property in this way to his wife, he is considered to bequeath what his wife could recover by an action on dowry.

Javolenus, Epistles, Book VII. A certain man who had been notified to discontinue the construction of a new building sold the land, and the purchaser continued the work; do you think that either the purchaser or the vendor is liable for having violated the Edict? The answer was that if, after notice had been served, the construction of the building was continued, the purchaser, that is to say, the owner of the land, would be liable; because a notice for discontinuance is not personal, and he only is liable who is in possession of the property on which the notice to discontinue the work was served.

The Same, Epistles, Book VII. An heir and an estate, although they have two different names, are still regarded as one person.

Javolenus, Epistles, Book VII. If a slave belonging to an estate, or to anyone who is in the hands of the enemy, should receive security for the payment of a debt, the time prescribed for said security begins to run immediately; for we must ascertain not whether he who placed a lien on the property can bring an action, but whether the person in whose favor it was encumbered has a right to do so against the former. Otherwise, it would be extremely unjust if, on account of the rank of the plaintiffs, the obligations of the defendants should be prolonged, since nothing can be done by them to prevent suit from being brought against them.

The Same, Epistles, Book VII. Labeo says that the clause, “Let any son born to my son, be my heir,” does not seem to include a daughter. Proculus is of the opposite opinion. Labeo appears to me to have followed the form of the words; Proculus the intention of the testator. I have no doubt that the opinion of Labeo is not correct.

The Same, Epistles, Book VII. Whenever a decision cannot be rendered without causing injury, that course should be adopted which is productive of the least injustice.