Membranarum libri
Ex libro I
Dig. 9,2,53Neratius libro primo membranarum. Boves alienos in angustum locum coegisti eoque effectum est, ut deicerentur: datur in te ad exemplum legis Aquiliae in factum actio.
Ad Dig. 9,2,53ROHGE, Bd. 20 (1877), Nr. 96, S. 382: Schaden durch Ausbringen eines Ankers im Hafen ohne Bezeichnung.Neratius, Parchments, Book I. You drove oxen belonging to another into a narrow place which caused them to be thrown to the ground and injured. An action resembling that brought under the Lex Aquilia will be granted against you.
Dig. 20,2,4Neratius libro primo membranarum. Eo iure utimur, ut quae in praedia urbana inducta illata sunt pignori esse credantur, quasi id tacite convenerit: in rusticis praediis contra observatur. 1Stabula quae non sunt in continentibus aedificiis quorum praediorum ea numero habenda sint, dubitari potest. et quidem urbanorum sine dubio non sunt, cum a ceteris aedificiis separata sint: quod ad causam tamen talis taciti pignoris pertinet, non multum ab urbanis praediis differunt.
Neratius, Parchments, Book I. It is our practice that whatever is placed on urban estates is considered to be pledged, as it were, by tacit agreement; in rustic estates, however, the contrary rule is observed. 1Ad Dig. 20,2,4,1ROHGE, Bd. 6 (1872), S. 281: Pfandrecht des Vermiethers an den eingebrachten zum Verkaufe bestimmten Waaren des Miethers. Zeitweise und dauernde Bestimmung der Verwendung.Can it be doubted whether stables which are not joined to other buildings should be considered as being included in these estates? And, indeed, there is no question with respect to urban estates, since they are separated from other buildings. However, with reference to a tacit pledge of this kind, they do not differ greatly from urban estates.
Dig. 27,10,9Neratius libro primo membranarum. Cuius bonis distrahendis curatores facere senatus permisit, eius bona creditoribus vendere non permisit, quamvis creditores post id beneficium bona vendere mallent: sicut enim integra re potestas ipsorum est utrum velint eligendi, ita cum alterum elegerint, altero abstinere debent. multoque magis id servari aequum est, si etiam factus est curator, per quem bona distraherentur, quamvis nondum explicato eo negotio decesserit. nam et tunc ex integro alius curator faciendus est neque heres prioris curatoris onerandus, cum accidere possit, ut negotio vel propter sexus vel propter aetatis infirmitatem vel propter dignitatem maiorem minoremve, quam in priore curatore spectata erat, habilis non sit, possint etiam plures heredes ei existere neque aut per omnes id negotium administrari expediat aut quicquam dici possit, cur unus aliquis ex his potissimum onerandus sit.
Neratius, Parchments, Book I. When the Senate permits the appointment of curators for the sale of property, it does not authorize the creditors to dispose of the same, even though they prefer to sell it after this privilege has been granted; as, while the latter have the right to choose whichever one they may desire, still, after they have selected one curator, they must not apply to another. It is much more just for this rule to be observed where the curator, after having been appointed for the sale of property, dies before the transaction has been concluded; for, in this instance, another curator must be appointed for the settlement of the entire matter, and the heir of the first curator cannot be entrusted with it, since it may happen that the heir may not be fitted for the business, either on account of sex, or the infirmity of age, or the higher or lower rank, of the former curator; and, moreover, there may be several heirs to the first curator, and it may not be expedient for all of them to transact the business, or some reason may be alleged why one of them should be charged with this duty rather than the others.
Dig. 28,5,55Neratius libro primo membranarum. Pater filio impuberi servum heredem substituit liberumque esse iussit: eum pupillus vendidit Titio: Titius eum iam primo testamento facto in secundo testamento liberum heredemque esse iussit. superius testamentum Titii ruptum est, quia is servus et heres potest esse et, ut superius testamentum rumpatur, sufficit ita posterius factum esse, ut aliquo casu potuerit ex eo heres existere. quod ad vim autem eius institutionis pertinet, ita se res habet, ut, quamdiu pupillo ex ea substitutione heres potest esse, ex Titii testamento libertatem hereditatemque consequi non possit: si pupillus in suam tutelam pervenerit, perinde ex Titii testamento liber heresque sit ac si pupillo substitutus non fuisset: si pupillo heres exstitit, propius est, ut Titio quoque, si velit, heres esse possit.
Neratius, Parchments, Book I. A father substituted his slave as heir to his minor son, and at the same time granted the latter his freedom, and the minor sold the said slave to Titius. Titius, who had already made one will, in a second ordered the slave to be free and his heir. The first will of Titius was broken because the said slave could be his heir; and as the first will was broken, it is sufficient that the one subsequently executed provided that the heir appointed by it should, in a certain contingency, succeed to the testator. With reference to the effect of this appointment, the result will be that as long as the heir can succeed to the minor by reason of this substitution, he can not obtain his freedom and the estate under the will of Titius. If the heir should obtain control of himself, he would then obtain his freedom, and the estate by the terms of the will of Titius, just as if he had not been substituted for the minor; and if he should become the heir of the minor, there is the best reason to conclude that he could also be the heir of Titius, if he was willing.
Dig. 47,2,65Neratius libro primo membranarum. A Titio herede homo Seio legatus ante aditam hereditatem Titio furtum fecit. si adita hereditate Seius legatum ad se pertinere voluerit, furti eius servi nomine aget cum eo Titius, quia neque tunc, cum faceret furtum, eius fuit, et (ut maxime quis existimet, si servus esse coeperit eius, cui furtum fecerat, tolli furti actionem, ut nec si alienatus sit, agi possit eo nomine) ne post aditam quidem hereditatem Titii factus est, quia ea, quae legantur, recta via ab eo qui legavit ad eum cui legata sunt transeunt.
Neratius, Parchments, Book I. Titius, an heir, having been charged with the legacy of a slave to Seius, the said slave committed a theft against Titius, before the estate was entered upon. If, after it had been entered upon, Seius should wish to have the legacy, Titius could bring an action for theft against him, on account of the act of the slave, because when the latter committed the crime, he did not belong to Titius; and even though anyone should hold that if the slave had begun to belong to him against whom he committed the theft, the right of action for theft would be extinguished, so that even if he was alienated, suit could not be brought on this ground. The slave did not become the property of Titius until after the estate had been entered upon, because legacies pass directly from the person who leaves them to him to whom they are bequeathed.
Dig. 50,5,4Neratius libro primo membranarum. Tempus vacationis, quod datur eis qui rei publicae causa afuerunt, non ex eo die numerandum est, quo quis abesse desiit, sed cum quodam laxamento itineris: neque enim minus abesse rei publicae causa intellegendus est, qui ad id negotium vel ab eo revertitur. si quis tamen plus iusto temporis aut itinere aut in alio loco commoratus consumpserit, ita ea interpretanda erit, ut ex eo tempore vacationis dies incipiat ei cedere, quo iter ex commodo peragere potuisset.
Neratius, Parchments, Book I. The term of exemption which is conceded to those who are absent on business for the State should not be calculated from the day on which the person ceased to be absent, but some time should be allowed him to rest after his journey; and he is still understood to be absent in the public service if he transacts any business either while going or returning. But if anyone delays longer than is proper while on his way, or in any place, in this instance, the time of exemption should be understood to begin from the date when he could have conveniently concluded his journey.