Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book XXI. In an action for the partition of an estate or for the division of property held in common, if, while the case is pending, a controversy arises concerning a right attaching to the land, it is established that all those with reference to whom the arbiter has been appointed can both bring suit and give notice of a new structure, each one in proportion to his respective interest in the property; and when an award is made by the arbiter, if the entire tract of land is adjudged to one party, security must be furnished that whatever is recovered by means of the actions must be delivered, and whatever expenses have been incurred on their account must be paid. And if, while the matter was in court, no proceedings were instituted with reference to the said land, the unimpaired right of action shall belong to him to whom the entire tract has been awarded, or in proportion to the share for which the award was made. 1Moreover, where there is any movable property which can be included in said actions, and in the meantime it should be stolen, proceedings for theft can be brought by the parties at whose risk the said property was.

Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book XXI. For it is only in accordance with natural equity that no one should profit pecuniarily by the injury of another.

Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book XXI. If I gave you some cups with the understanding that you were to return them to me, an action on loan for use will lie. If, however, I gave them to you on condition that you would deliver to me their weight in silver, whatever that might be; a demand for the recovery of this weight must be made by means of an action for the construction of the contract, as well as one for silver of the same fineness as that of which the cups were composed. But, if it was agreed that you should return the cups, or an amount of silver equal to their weight, the same rule will apply.

Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book XXI. Where there is a party-wall between two houses, it is customary to stipulate against threatened injury with reference to the house belonging to each individual owner; but security is not necessary, except where one of them alone builds, and damage is feared on account of the work, or where one of them has a more valuable house than the other, and will sustain greater damage if the wall should fall. Otherwise, where the risk is equal on both sides, the same amount of security given by one of them to his neighbor should also be exacted from the former. 1Where the title to a building is in dispute, the burden of furnishing security against threatened injury rests upon the party in possession, as he can recover from the owner of the land whatever he may be compelled to pay out for this purpose. If, however, he should not furnish security, possession shall be given to the plaintiff, who demanded security against threatened injury; for it would be unjust for the stipulator to be compelled to abandon the land, which he fears may be damaged, in order to search for the owner. 2The stipulation with reference to threatened injury has a very broad application. Hence this stipulation is advantageous to one whose house, built upon the land of another, is damaged. It is also advantageous to the owner of the land, in case the latter is injured in such a way that the entire surface is removed, for he will then lose the income which he would otherwise have received. 3It is lawful to stipulate in the name of another that any damage which may be sustained by the owner shall be included. He, however, who stipulates should give security that the owner will ratify the transaction, and the exception referring to the agent should be inserted in the stipulation, as in the case of those relating to legacies. If security is not furnished him, the agent should, by all means, be placed in possession, so that the exception relative to his agency may not prejudice him. 4In making the estimate for the new wall, an account must be taken of the expense, which should not exceed a reasonable sum; and the ornamentation of the old wall ought to be considered, provided the expense is not increased too much by doing so.

Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book XXI. Where a party-wall is to be repaired, that owner should have the opportunity to do the work who can perform it in the most suitable manner. It must also be said that this rule will apply where the same road or water-course is to be repaired by two or more persons.

Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book XXI. My fugitive slave, pretending to be a freeman, lent you money which he had stolen from me. Labeo says that you are liable to me, and if you, believing him to be free, should pay him, you will be released, so far as I am concerned. If, however, you pay another by his order, or you ratify such a payment, you will not be released; because, in the first instance, the money becomes mine, and is understood to be paid, as it were, to myself. Hence, my slave, by collecting what he lent as part of his peculium, will release the debtor, but if he delegates him or makes a novation, this will not be the case.