Ad Ferocem libri
Ex libro IV
Dig. 3,3,47Iulianus libro quarto ad Urseium Ferocem. Qui duos procuratores omnium rerum suarum reliquit, nisi nominatim praecepit ut alter ab altero pecuniam petat, non videtur mandatum utrilibet eorum dedisse.
Julianus, On Urseius Ferox. Where a man leaves two agents to attend to all his business, unless he expressly states that one is to bring suit against the other for money, it cannot be maintained that such a mandate was given to either of them.
Dig. 9,4,34Iulianus libro quarto ad Urseium Ferocem. quotiens enim nemo filium familias ex causa delicti defendit, in eum iudicium datur
Julianus, On Urseius Ferox, Book IV. For whenever no one will undertake the defence of the son of a family on account of a breach of the law, an action is granted against him,
Dig. 11,1,18Iulianus libro quarto ad Urseium Ferocem. Qui ex parte dimidia heres erat cum absentem coheredem suum defendere vellet, ut satisdationis onus evitare possit, respondit se solum heredem esse et condemnatus est: quaerebat actor, cum ipse solvendo non esset, an rescisso superiore iudicio in eum, qui re vera heres erat, actio dari deberet. Proculus respondit rescisso iudicio posse agi, idque est verum.
Ad Dig. 11,1,18Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 118, Note 6.Julianus, On Urseius Ferox, Book IV. Where a person who was heir to half of an estate wished to defend his absent co-heir, and, in order to avoid the burden of furnishing security, answered that he was the sole heir, and judgment was rendered against him; the plaintiff asked whether, as the party was insolvent, the former judgment could not be rescinded, and an action be granted him who was really the heir. Proculus answered that the judgment could be rescinded and the action be brought, and this is correct.
Dig. 16,1,16Idem libro quarto ad Urseium Ferocem. Si mulier contra senatus consultum Velleianum pro me intercessisset Titio egoque mulieri id solvissem et ab ea Titius eam pecuniam peteret, exceptio huius senatus consulti non est profutura mulieri: neque enim eam periclitari, ne eam pecuniam perdat, cum iam eam habeat. 1Si ab ea muliere, quae contra senatus consultum intercessisset, fideiussorem accepissem, Gaius Cassius respondit ita demum fideiussori exceptionem dandam, si a muliere rogatus fuisset. Iulianus autem recte putat fideiussori exceptionem dandam, etiamsi mandati actionem adversus mulierem non habet, quia totam obligationem senatus improbat et a praetore restituitur prior debitor creditori.
The Same, On Urseius Ferox, Book IV. If a woman has become surety for me to Titius, in violation of the Velleian Decree of the Senate, and Titius sues her for the money which I have paid her, she cannot avail herself of the exception based on the Decree of the Senate, for she was in no danger of losing the money, since she already has it in her possession. 1If I have accepted a surety for a woman who has bound herself in violation of the Decree of the Senate, Gaius Cassius answered that an exception should be granted to the said surety, only to the extent that the woman had asked him to be responsible for her. Julianus, however, thinks very properly than an exception should be granted to the surety, even though he is not entitled to an action on mandate against the woman; for the reason that the Senate disapproves of the entire obligation, and the liability of the former debtor to the creditor is reestablished by the Prætor.
Dig. 44,1,15Iulianus libro quarto ad Urseium Ferocem. Adversus exceptionem iurisiurandi replicatio doli mali non debet dari, cum praetor id agere debet, ne de iureiurando cuiusquam quaeratur.
Julianus, On Urseius Ferox, Book IV. A replication alleging bad faith should not be pleaded against an exception founded upon an oath taken in court, as the Prætor should see that no question is subsequently raised with reference to such an oath.
Dig. 47,2,59Iulianus libro quarto ad Urseium Ferocem. Si filio familias furtum factum esset, recte is pater familias factus eo nomine aget. sed et si res ei locata subrepta fuerit, pater familias factus itidem agere poterit.
Julianus, On Urseius Ferox, Book IV. If property should be stolen from a son under paternal control, he can properly bring an action for this cause after he becomes the head of a household. Where property which has been leased to him has been stolen, he can also bring an action on this account, after he becomes independent.