Ex variis lectionibus libri
Ex libro X
Dig. 35,1,58Idem libro decimo ex variis lectionibus. Si ancillae alienae, cum ea nubsisset, legatum sit, Proculus ait utile legatum esse, quia possit manumissa nubere.
The Same, On Various Passages, Book X. Where a legacy is left to a female slave belonging to another, “provided she should marry,” Proculus says that the legacy is valid, because she can marry after having been manumitted.
Dig. 39,3,22Idem libro decimo ex variis lectionibus. Si usus fructus fundi legatus fuerit, aquae pluviae arcendae actio heredi et cum herede est, cuius praedium fuerit. quod si ex opere incommodum aliquod patitur fructuarius, poterit quidem interdum vel interdicto experiri quod vi aut clam. quod si ei non competet, quaerendum est, an utilis ei quasi domino actio aquae pluviae arcendae dari debeat an vero etiam contendat ius sibi esse uti frui: sed magis est utilem aquae pluviae arcendae ei actionem accommodare. 1Non aliter restituisse rem videtur is qui opus fecit, quam si aquam coerceat. 2Sed et si fructuarius opus fecerit, per quod aqua pluvia alicui noceat, erit quidem actio legitima cum domino proprietatis: an vero etiam utilis in fructuarium actio aquae pluviae arcendae danda sit, quaesitum est: et magis est ut detur.
The Same, Various Passages, Book X. If the usufruct of land is bequeathed, the action to compel care to be taken of the rain-water will lie for, as well as against the heir of him to whom the property belonged. If the usufructuary should suffer any inconvenience on account of some work which has been performed, he can sometimes avail himself of the interdict Quod vi aut clam. If the action cannot be brought by the usufructuary, the question arises whether equitable action should be granted him, as the owner, to compel the water to be taken care of; or whether he can also maintain that he has the right to enjoy the property. The better opinion, however, is that an equitable action to compel care to be taken of the rain-water should be granted. 1He who constructs a new work will not be considered to have restored the property to its former condition, unless he intercepts the course of the water of which complaint is made. 2But even if the usufructuary should construct the work by which the rain-water may cause damage to anyone, the legal action against the owner of the property will lie; but the question arises whether an equitable action to compel the water to be taken care of should not be granted against the usufructuary. The better opinion is that it should be granted.