Responsorum libri
Ex libro IX
Dig. 31,33Idem libro nono responsorum. Respondit: legatorum petitio adversus heredes pro partibus hereditariis competit nec pro his qui solvendo non sunt onerari coheredes oportet. 1Qui plures heredes instituit, testamento a quibusdam nominatim reliquit legata, postea codicillos ad omnes heredes scripsit: quaero, quae legata debeant. Modestinus respondit: cum manifeste testator testamento expresserit, a quibus heredibus legata praestari vellet, licet codicillos ad omnes scripserit, apparet tamen ea quae codicillis dedit ab his praestanda esse, quos munere fungi debere testamento suo ostendit testator.
The Same, Opinions, Book IX. Legatees have a right to claim their legacies from each one of the heirs in proportion to his share of the estate, but some co-heirs cannot be charged with legacies for others who are insolvent. 1A testator appointed several heirs, and charged some of them with legacies, and afterwards he made a codicil including all his heirs. I ask which of the heirs will be charged with the legacies? Modestinus answered, that as the testator had plainly indicated in his will by which of his heirs he desired the legacies to be paid, and even though he addressed his codicil to all of them, still, it is evident that what he bequeathed by the codicil must be paid by those whom he showed by his will he intended should discharge that duty.
Dig. 33,2,16Modestinus libro nono responsorum. Legatum civitati relictum est, ut ex reditibus quotannis in ea civitate memoriae conservandae defuncti gratia spectaculum celebretur, quod illic celebrari non licet: quaero, quid de legato existimes. respondit, cum testator spectaculum edi voluerit in civitate, sed tale, quod ibi celebrari non licet, iniquum esse hanc quantitatem, quam in spectaculum defunctus destinaverit, lucro heredum cedere: igitur adhibitis heredibus et primoribus civitatis dispiciendum est, in quam rem converti debeat fideicommissum, ut memoria testatoris alio et licito genere celebretur.
Modestinus, Opinions, Book IX. A legacy was bequeathed to a town, so that from its income an exhibition might be given there every year for the purpose of preserving the memory of the deceased. It was not lawful for the exhibition to take place there, and I ask what opinion should be given with reference to the legacy. Modestinus answered that, as the testator intended the spectacle to be exhibited in the town, but it was of such a character that this could not be done, it would be unjust for the heir to profit by such a large sum of money as the deceased had destined for this purpose. Therefore, the heirs as well as the first citizens of the place should be called together in order to determine how the trust could be changed so that the memory of the testator might be celebrated in another and a lawful manner.
Dig. 33,2,18Modestinus libro nono responsorum. Qui plures habebat libertos, testamento suo dixit se habitationem relinquere iis quos codicillis designasset: cum nullos postea designaverit, quaero, an omnes admitti debeant. respondit, si patronus, qui se designaturum personas libertorum pollicitus est, nullum postea designavit, legatum habitationis perfectum esse non videtur, non existente cui datum intellegi possit.
Modestinus, Opinions, Book IX. A testator, who had several freedmen, said in his will that he left lodging to those whom he designated in a codicil. As he did not afterwards designate anyone, I ask whether all of them would be admitted to share in the legacy. The answer was that, since the patron promised to designate certain of his freedmen, and did not afterwards designate any, the legacy with reference to the lodging was held to be imperfect, as there was no one in existence to whom it could be understood that it was given.
Dig. 33,10,8Modestinus libro nono responsorum. Cum quidam uxori suae legaverat domum cum iure suo omni et instrumento et supellectili, quaerebatur, an videretur et argentum escale et potorium legato contineri. respondit, si quid in supellectili argentum est, deberi, escale autem vel potorium argentum non deberi, nisi hoc quoque testatorem sensisse legatarius doceat.
Modestinus, Opinions, Book IX. A husband having devised to his wife a house with all its appurtenances, its utensils, and its furniture, the question was asked whether the silver table service, both for eating and drinking, was included in the legacy. The answer was that if anything made of silver was found among the furniture, it would be included, but that the silver for table service would not be, unless the legatee could prove that the testator had the intention of bequeathing it also.
Dig. 33,10,13Modestinus libro nono responsorum. Respondit: numquam ex eo, quod supellectilem legavit maritus testamento, habitationem, in qua supellex fuit, legasse videtur. quare contra defuncti voluntatem habitationem sibi mulierem vindicare procul dubio est.
Modestinus, Opinions, Book IX. He gives it as his opinion that where a husband bequeaths his household goods to his wife by will, he should never be considered to have devised to her the residence in which the said household goods were situated; and therefore there is no doubt whatever, if the woman should claim the residence for herself, that this would be contrary to the intention of the deceased.