Epistularum libri
Ex libro XI
Dig. 18,1,69Idem libro undecimo epistularum. Rutilia Polla emit lacum sabatenem angularium et circa eum lacum pedes decem: quaero, numquid et decem pedes, qui tunc accesserunt, sub aqua sint, quia lacus crevit, an proximi pedes decem ab aqua Rutiliae pollae iuris sint. Proculus respondit: ego existimo eatenus lacum, quem emit Rutilia polla, venisse quatenus tunc fuit, et circa eum decem pedes qui tunc fuerunt, nec ob eam rem, quod lacus postea crevit, latius eum possidere debet quam emit.
The Same, Epistles, Book XI. Rutilia Polla bought the lake at the corner of the Sabatine estate, and ten feet of ground around said lake. I ask if the lake should become larger, whether the ten feet of land due to Rutilia Polla are those which are under water, or the ten feet around the water, after the lake has increased in size? Proculus answered: “I think that the lake which Rutilia Polla bought was sold to her in the condition that it was at the time, with the ten feet of land which then surrounded it, and because the lake afterwards increased in size she should not be entitled to the possession of more ground than she purchased.”
Dig. 19,5,12Proculus libro undecimo epistularum. Si vir uxori suae fundos vendidit et in venditione comprehensum est convenisse inter eos, si ea nupta ei esse desisset, ut eos fundos si ipse vellet, eodem pretio mulier transcriberet viro: in factum existimo iudicium esse reddendum idque et in aliis personis observandum.
Proculus, Epistles, Book XI. Where a man sold certain lands to his wife, and an agreement was entered into at the time that, if the marriage was dissolved, the wife should transfer to her husband the said lands for the same price, if he desired her to do so, I think that an action in factum ought to be granted, and that this rule should also be observed with reference to other persons.
Dig. 23,4,17Proculus libro undecimo epistularum. Atilicinus Proculo suo salutem. Cum inter virum et uxorem pactum conventum ante nuptias factum sit, ut quibus diebus dos data esset, isdem divortio facto redderetur, post quinquennium quam nuptiae factae sunt uxor viro dotem dedit: divortio facto quaero, utrum quinquennii die vir uxori dotem redderet an statuto legibus tempore. Proculus respondit: quod ad diem reddendae dotis attinet, pacto existimo meliorem condicionem mulieris fieri posse, deteriorem non posse: itaque si cautum est, ut propiore tempore, quam legibus constitutum est, reddatur, stari eo debere, si ut longiore, nec valere id pactum conventum. cuius sententiae conveniens est dicere, si pacto convento cautum est, ut quanto serius quaeque et post nuptias data fuerit, tanto post divortium reddatur, si propiore, quam in reddenda dote constitutum est, data sit, valere pactum conventum, si longiore, non valere.
Proculus, Epistles, Book XI. Atilicinus to his friend Proculus, Greeting: “Where an agreement was made between a man and his wife before marriage, that, in case a divorce took place, the same time should be granted for the return of the dowry that was given for its bestowal; the woman gave the dowry to her husband five years after marriage. A divorce having taken place, I ask whether the husband should restore the dowry to his wife within five years, or whether he must do so within the time fixed by law? Proculus answered with reference to the time of returning the dowry: “I think that by an agreement the condition of the woman can be improved and cannot be made worse; therefore, if it is provided that the dowry shall be returned in a shorter time than that established by law, it should be carried out, but if it is agreed to return it after a longer time, such a contract is not valid.” As to this opinion, it is proper to state that if it is proved by the agreement that, after divorce, there should be the same delay for the return of the dowry as there was for its delivery after marriage, and if this delay in returning it was shorter than that authorized by law, the agreement will be valid, but if it is longer, it will not be.