Imperialium sententiarum in cognitionibus prolatarum libri
Dig. 28,5,93Idem imperialium sententiarum in cognitionibus prolatarum ex libris sex primo seu decretorum libro secundo. 1Pactumeius Androsthenes Pactumeiam Magnam filiam Pactumeii Magni ex asse heredem instituerat, eique patrem eius substituerat. Pactumeio Magno occiso et rumore perlato, quasi filia quoque eius mortua, mutavit testamentum Noviumque Rufum heredem instituit hac praefatione: ‘quia heredes, quos volui habere mihi contingere non potui, Novius Rufus heres esto’. Pactumeia Magna supplicavit imperatores nostros et cognitione suscepta, licet modus institutioni contineretur, quia falsus non solet obesse, tamen ex voluntate testantis putavit imperator ei subveniendum. igitur pronuntiavit hereditatem ad magnam pertinere, sed legata ex posteriore testamento eam praestare debere, proinde atque si in posterioribus tabulis ipsa fuisset heres scripta.
The Same, On the First of the Six Books Relating to the Imperial Decisions; or the Second Book of the Decrees. 1Pactumeius Androsthenes appointed Pactumeia Magna, the daughter of Pactumeius Magnus, heir to his entire estate, and substituted her father for her. Pactumeius Magnus, having been killed, and the rumor having been spread that his daughter was also dead, the testator changed his will, and appointed Novius Rufus his heir, with this preamble: “Let Novius Rufus be my heir, for the reason that I have not been able to retain those heirs whom I desired to have.” Pactumeia Magna applied to our Emperors, and the case having been heard, it was decided that she was entitled to relief, as this was in compliance with the wishes of the testator; and while there was a certain reason for the appointment of the other heir, still, as it was ill founded, it could not legally be interposed. Therefore, the decision was that the estate belonged to Magna, but that she would be compelled to pay the legacies bequeathed by the second will, just as if she herself had been appointed heir by the said will.
Dig. 35,1,113Paulus imperialium sententiarum in cognitionibus prolatarum ex libris sex libro secundo. Cum filius rogatus fuisset a patre, si, antequam res suas administrare posset, decessisset, hereditatem Titio restituere, et egressus viginti annos decessisset, rescriptum est fideicommissum deberi.
Paulus, From the Second Book of the Collection of Imperial Decisions in Matters Brought Before the Emperors; Embraced in Six Books. Where a son was charged by his father, “To deliver his estate to Titius, if he should die before he himself could administer his affairs,” and the son died after reaching the twentieth year, it was stated in a Rescript that the trust must be executed.
Dig. 36,1,83Paulus imperialium sententiarum in cognitionibus prolatarum ex libris VI libro primo seu decretorum libro II. Iulius Foebus testamento facto, cum tres liberos heredes institueret, Foebum et Heracliam ex eadem matre, Polycraten ex alia aequis portionibus, petit a Polycrate minore fratre, ut accepto certo praedio hereditatem fratribus concederet: et invicem eos, qui ex eadem matre erant, si qui eorum heres non fuisset, substituerat. Polycrati, si intra pubertatem decessisset, secundas tabulas fecit, quas matri eius commendavit aperiendas, si inpubes obisset. deinde petit a prioribus, ut, si quis eorum sine liberis decederet, portionem suam exceptis bonis maternis eorum et avitis ei vel eis qui superessent restitueret. Heraclia soror mortua sine liberis fratrem Foebum heredem instituit: Polycrates fideicommissum petierat et optinuerat apud Aurelium Proculum proconsulem Achaiae: appellatione facta, cum solus Foebus egisset μονομερῶς, victus est, quia ‘ei vel eis’ verba utrosque fratres complecterentur. adqui invicem duos illos tantum substituerat: sed et voluntas haec patris videbatur, qui exceperat eorum bona materna, quia Polycrates aliam matrem et quidem superstitem habebat, cuius etiam fidei commissum erat, ut legata, quae ei dederat in testamento, moriens Polycrati filio suo restitueret. ...
Paulus, The Six Books of Imperial Opinions rendered in Judicial Proceedings, Book I, Otherwise, Decrees, Book XI. Julius Phoebus, having made a will, appointed his three children heirs (that is to say, Phoebus and Heraclia by his first wife, and Polycrates by his second) to equal shares of his estate, and asked Polycrates, the younger brother, to give up the estate to his brothers, in consideration of receiving a certain tract of land; and he substituted the two other brothers, born of the same mother, for one another, if one of them should not become his heir. By a second will he made a pupillary substitution for Polycrates, if the latter should die before reaching puberty, and provided that this will should be opened by the mother, if the boy should die under that age. He then charged the two older brothers, if either of them should die without issue, to transfer his share to the survivor, or survivors, after deducting the property derived from the estates of their mother, and grandfather. The sister Heraclia died without leaving any children, and appointed her brother Phoebus, her heir. Polycrates brought an action to compel the execution of the trust, and gained his case before Aurelius Proculus, Proconsul of Achaia. An appeal having been taken by Phoebus alone, the other party to the suit being absent, he was defeated, because the words “The survivor or the survivors” included both brothers. Although reciprocal substitution was made only of the two oldest children, the intention of the father was held to be that he had excepted the property of the mother of the said children, because Polycrates had a different mother who was still living, and who had been charged to transfer to her son Polycrates the same legacies which had passed to her husband through his first wife having died intestate.
Dig. 37,14,24Paulus imperialium sententiarum in cognitionibus prolatarum sive decretorum ex libris sex libro primo. Camelia Pia ab Hermogene appellaverat, quod diceret iudicem de dividenda hereditate inter se et coheredem non tantum res, sed etiam libertos divisisse: nullo enim iure id eum fecisse. placuit nullam esse libertorum divisionem: alimentorum autem divisionem a iudice inter coheredes factam eodem modo ratam esse.
Paulus, In the First of the Six Books of the Imperial Decrees Rendered in Council; or the Imperial Decisions. Camelia Pia appealed from the decision of Hermogenes, which set forth that the judge who had jurisdiction over an estate to be divided between herself and her co-heir had divided not only the property, but the freedmen as well. It was decided that this had not been done in accordance with any law, and that the division of the freedmen was void; but that the appointment of the provisions made by the judge among the co-heirs should be confirmed without any alteration.
Dig. 40,1,10Idem imperialium sententiarum in cognitionibus prolatarum ex libris sex libro secundo. Aelianus debitor fiscalis Euemeriam ancillam ante annos multos emerat hac lege, ut manumitteret, eamque manumiserat: procurator cum bona debitoris non sufficientia quaereret, etiam Euemeriae status quaestionem faciebat. placuit non esse iuri fiscali locum, quo omnia bona debitorum iure pignoris tenerentur, quia ea lege empta est, et, si non manumitteretur, ex constitutione divi Marci ad libertatem perveniret.
Book II of the Six Books of the Imperial Decrees having Reference to Judicial Investigations. Ilianus, a debtor of the Treasury, having many years before purchased a female slave named Evemeria under the condition that he should manumit her, did so. As the Agent of the Treasury did not find the property of the debtor sufficient to satisfy his creditors, he raised a question with reference to the status of Evemeria. It was decided that there was no ground for the exercise of the right of the Treasury, under which all the property of debtors is liable by the law of pledge, because the slave had been purchased under the condition of being manumitted, and if this had not been done, she would have been entitled to her freedom under the Constitution of the Divine Marcus.
Dig. 50,16,240Paulus ex libris sex libro primo imperialium sententiarum in cognitionibus prolatarum. Cum quaerebatur, an verbum ‘soluto matrimonio dotem reddi’ non tantum divortium, sed et mortem contineret, hoc est an de hoc quoque casu contrahentes sentirent, et multi putabant hoc sensisse, et quibusdam aliis contra videbatur: secundum: hoc motus imperator pronuntiavit id actum eo pacto, ut nullo casu remaneret dos apud maritum.
Paulus, On the Six Books of Imperial Decrees having Reference to Judicial Inquiries, Book I. The question arose whether the expression, “The dowry shall be returned in case the marriage is dissolved,” refers not only to divorce, but also to death; that is to say, whether this was the intention of the contracting parties in the present instance; and several authorities think that it was the intention, while the contrary opinion is held by others. On this account, the Emperor decided that “the agreement was that, under no circumstances, the dowry should remain in the hands of the husband.