Opinionum libri
Ex libro V
Dig. 1,5,27Ulpianus libro quinto opinionum. Eum, qui se libertinum esse fatetur, nec adoptando patronus ingenuum facere potuit.
Dig. 1,7,25Idem libro quinto opinionum. Post mortem filiae suae, quae ut mater familias quasi iure emancipata vixerat et testamento scriptis heredibus decessit, adversus factum suum, quasi non iure eam nec praesentibus testibus emancipasset, pater movere controversiam prohibetur. 1Neque adoptare neque adrogare quis absens nec per alium eiusmodi sollemnitatem peragere potest.
The Same, Opinions, Book V. After the death of his daughter who had been living as her own mistress on the ground of having been lawfully emancipated, and who died after appointing heirs by her will, the father is forbidden to institute proceedings against his own act, claiming that the emancipation was not made legally, or in the presence of witnesses. 1A party who is absent can neither adopt, nor arrogate, nor carry out by the agency of another any of the formalities which are requisite in such cases.
Dig. 4,2,23Ulpianus libro quintoaaDie Großausgabe liest quarto statt quinto. opinionum. Non est verisimile compulsum in urbe inique indebitum solvisse eum, qui claram dignitatem se habere praetendebat, cum potuerit ius publicum invocare et adire aliquem potestate praeditum, qui utique vim eum pati prohibuisset: sed huiusmodi praesumptioni debet apertissimas probationes violentiae opponere. 1Si iusto metu perterritus cognitionem, ad quam ut vinctus iret, potens adversarius minabatur, id quod habere licebat compulsus vendidit, res suae aequitati per praesidem provinciae restituitur. 2Si faenerator inciviliter custodiendo athletam et a certaminibus prohibendo cavere compulerit ultra quantitatem debitae pecuniae, his probatis competens iudex rem suae aequitati restitui decernat. 3Si quis, quod adversario non debebat, delegante eo per vim, apparitione praesidis interveniente, sine notione iudicis, coactus est dare, iudex inciviliter extorta restitui ab eo, qui rei damnum praestiterit, iubeat. quod si debitis satisfecit simplici iussione et non cognitione habita, quamvis non extra ordinem exactionem fieri, sed civiliter oportuit, tamen quae solutioni debitarum ab eo quantitatium profecerunt, revocare incivile est.
Ulpianus, Opinions, Book V. It is not probable that a person would pay in a city, under compulsion and unjustly, something which he did not owe, if he showed that he was of illustrious rank; since he could invoke the public law, and apply to someone vested with authority who would forbid his being treated with violence. The strongest possible proof of violence must be given in order to overcome this presumption. 1Where anyone being justly terrified at the prospect of a judicial examination to which a powerful adversary threatens to send him in chains; sells under compulsion what he had a right to retain, the matter shall be restored to its proper condition by the Governor of the province. 2Where a money-broker keeps an athlete in confinement contrary to law, and, by preventing him from engaging in contests, compels him to give security for a larger sum of money than he owes; a competent judge will, where this is proved, order the matter to be restored to its proper condition. 3Where anyone is compelled, by the intervention of the officers of the Governor, by force and without judicial proceedings, to pay money which he does not owe to a party claiming under an assignment; the judge will order what was unlawfully extorted to be restored by him who inflicted the injury. If, however, he paid his debt upon a simple demand, and not as the result of judicial proceedings, even though the party should have acted legally and not have collected the debt in an irregular way, still, it is not in accordance with law to set aside a transaction which brought about the payment of an obligation which was due.
Dig. 4,3,38Idem libro quinto opinionum. Quidam debitor epistulam quasi a Titio mitti creditori suo effecit, ut ipse liberetur: hac epistula creditor deceptus Aquiliana stipulatione et acceptilatione liberavit debitorem: postea epistula falsa vel inani reperta creditor maior quidem annis viginti quinque de dolo habebit actionem, minor autem in integrum restituetur.
The Same, Opinions, Book V. A certain debtor caused a letter to be sent to his creditor, which appeared to have been written by Titius, asking that he be discharged from liability; and the creditor, having been deceived by this letter, discharged the debtor by an Aquilian stipulation and a release. If the letter should afterwards be ascertained to be forged, or worthless, the creditor, if he is over twenty-five years of age, will be entitled to an action on the ground of fraud, and the minor shall obtain complete restitution.
Dig. 4,4,40Ulpianus libro quinto opinionum. Minor annis viginti quinque, cui fideicommissum solvi pronuntiatum erat, caverat id se accepisse et cautionem eidem debitor quasi creditae pecuniae fecerat. in integrum restitui potest, quia partam ex causa iudicati persecutionem novo contractu ad initium alterius petitionis redegerat. 1Praedia patris sui minor annis viginti quinque ob debita rationis tutelae aliorum, quam pater administraverat, in solutum inconsulte dedit: ad suam aequitatem per in integrum restitutionem revocanda res est, usuris pecuniae, quam constiterit ex tutela deberi, reputatis et cum quantitate fructuum perceptorum compensatis.
Ulpianus, Opinions, Book V. A minor under twenty-five years of age obtained a judgment ordering that a legacy, based upon a trust, be paid to him; he gave a release for it, and the debtor furnished him security, just as if he would have done if the money had been borrowed. Under these circumstances, the minor is entitled to complete restitution; for the reason that he had obtained a right to bring an action for money on account of a judgment, and by a new contract he had changed that right for one for the institution of proceedings of another kind. 1A minor under twenty-five years of age, without proper deliberation, surrendered land which belonged to his father in settlement of debts shown by the accounts to belong to the guardianship of other minors, whose affairs his father had transacted. Complete restitution was ordered that matters might be equitably restored to their former condition, and the amount of interest which appeared to be due on account of the guardianship was calculated and set off against the amount of the profits received.
Dig. 4,4,44Ulpianus libro quinto opinionum. Non omnia, quae minores annis viginti quinque gerunt, irrita sunt, sed ea tantum, quae causa cognita eiusmodi deprehensa sunt, vel ab aliis circumventi vel sua facilitate decepti aut quod habuerunt amiserunt, aut quod adquirere emolumentum potuerunt omiserint, aut se oneri quod non suscipere licuit obligaverunt.
Ad Dig. 4,4,44ROHGE, Bd. 6 (1872), S. 356: In integrum restitutio Minderjähriger nach gemeinem Rechte insbesondere gegen wechselrechtliche Verpflichtungen. Selbstständige Vermögensvertretung.Ulpianus, Opinions, Book V. All the acts of minors under twenty-five years of age are not invalid, but only those of such as, after investigation, are ascertained to have been overreached; as where they were imposed upon by others, or were deceived by their own credulity, or lost something which they formerly had, or failed to obtain some profit which they could have acquired, or subjected themselves to some liability which they ought not to have assumed.
Dig. 4,6,40Ulpianus libro quinto opinionum. Si qua militi accusatio competat tempore, quo rei publicae operam dedit, non peremitur. 1Quod eo tempore, quo in insula aliquis fuit ex poena ei irrogata, cuius restitutionem impetravit, ab alio usurpatum ex bonis, quae non erant adempta, probatum fuerit, suae causae restituendum est.
Ulpianus, Opinions, Book V. Where it is in the power of a soldier to institute criminal proceedings during the time that he is devoting his services to the State, he is not deprived of his right to do so. 1Where a person is detained on an island in accordance with the penalty imposed upon him on account of which he obtained restitution, and it is proved that a portion of the property of which he had not been deprived has been appropriated by some one else, it must be restored to him.
Dig. 4,7,11Idem libro quinto opinionum. Cum miles postulabat suo nomine litigare de possessionibus, quas sibi donatas esse dicebat, responsum est, si iudicii mutandi causa donatio facta fuerit, priorem dominum experiri oportere, ut rem magis quam litem in militem transtulisse credatur.
The Same, Opinions, Book V. When a soldier applied to bring suit in his own name in order to obtain an estate which he alleged had been presented to him; he was told that if the gift had been made for the purpose of changing the conditions of the trial, the action must be brought by the former owner, so that it might appear that he had transferred the property to the soldier, rather than a lawsuit.
Dig. 5,1,81Ulpianus libro quinto opinionum. Qui neque iurisdictioni praeest neque a principe potestate aliqua praeditus est neque ab eo qui ius dandorum iudicum habet datus est nec ex compromisso sumptus vel ex aliqua lege confirmatus est, iudex esse non potuit.
Dig. 5,2,29Ulpianus libro quinto opinionum. Si suspecta collusio sit legatariis inter scriptos heredes et eum qui de inofficioso testamento agit: adesse etiam legatarios et voluntatem defuncti tueri constitutum est, eisdemque permissum est etiam appellare, si contra testamentum pronuntiatum fuerit. 1De inofficioso testamento matris spurii quoque filii dicere possunt. 2Quamvis instituta inofficiosi testamenti accusatione res transactione decisa sit, tamen testamentum in suo iure manet: et ideo datae in eo libertates atque legata, usque quo Falcidia permittit, suam habent potestatem. 3Quoniam femina nullum adoptare filium sine iussu principis potest, nec de inofficioso testamento eius, quam quis sibi matrem adoptivam falso esse existimabat, agere potest. 4In ea provincia de inofficioso testamento agi oportet, in qua scripti heredes domicilium habent.
Ulpianus, Opinions, Book V. Where it is suspected by the legatees that collusion exists between the appointed heirs and the person who is bringing suit against the will as inofficious, it has been established that the legatees have a right to appear and defend the will of the deceased, and they are also permitted to appeal, if a judgment is rendered against the will. 1Illegitimate children also can likewise object to the will of their mother on the ground of inofficiousness. 2When an attack on account of inofficiousness is made against a will, although the case may be settled by compromise, the will still remains in full force and effect; and therefore any testamentary grants of freedom and bequests contained therein still continue to be valid to the extent permitted by the Lex Falcidia. 3Since a woman can never adopt a son without the consent of the Emperor, no man can institute proceedings on the ground of inofficiousness against the will of the woman whom he erroneously thought to be his adoptive mother. 4Proceedings on the ground that a will is inofficious must be instituted in the province in which the testamentary heirs have their residence.
Dig. 12,1,26Idem libro quinto opinionum. Si pecuniam militis procurator eius mutuam dedit fideiussoremque accepit, exemplo eo quo si tutor pupilli aut curator iuvenis pecuniam alterutrius eorum creditam stipulatus fuerit, actionem dari militi cuius pecunia fuerit placuit.
The Same, Opinions, Book V. If the agent of a soldier lends money and takes a surety, it is established that an action will be granted the soldier to whom the money belonged; just as in the case where the guardian of a ward or the curator of a youth stipulates for the repayment of money loaned which belonged to either of them.
Dig. 27,9,9Idem libro quinto opinionum. Quamvis antecessor praesidis decrevisset ea praedia venumdari, quae tutor pupilli, subiecto nomine alterius emptoris, ipse sibi comparabat, tamen, si fraudem et dolum contra senatus consulti auctoritatem et fidem tutori commissam deprehendisset successor eius, aestimabit, quatenus tam callidum commentum etiam in exemplum coercere debeat.
The Same, Opinions, Book V. Although a former Governor may have authorized the sale of land belonging to a ward, and his guardian should then purchase it for himself, through the agency of another buyer; still, if the successor of the said Governor should ascertain that fraud and bad faith had been committed by the guardian in violation of the Decree of the Senate, he must determine as to what extent he shall punish such a fraudulent act, by way of example.
Dig. 47,13,1Ulpianus libro quinto opinionum. Si simulato praesidis iussu concussio intervenit, ablatum eiusmodi terrore restitui praeses provinciae iubet et delictum coercet.
Dig. 48,23,2Idem libro quinto opinionum. Si deportatus restitutus dignitatem quidem indulgentia principis reciperavit, in sua autem omnia bona non est restitutus, nec a creditoribus nec publico nomine conveniri potest. sed cum ei facultas oblata esset a principe bona quoque sua reciperandi, maluerit ea derelinquere, actionibus exuere se, quibus ante sententiam subiectus fuerat, non poterit.
The Same, Opinions, Book V. When a person who has been deported and restored regains his rank by the indulgence of the Emperor, but does not recover all his property, he can neither be sued by his creditors nor by the Treasury. When, however, the power of recovering his property also is offered him by the Emperor, and he prefers to relinquish it, he cannot avoid any actions brought against him before he was sentenced.
Dig. 49,15,21Ulpianus libro quinto opinionum. Si quis ingenuam ab hostibus redemptam eo animo secum habuerit, ut ex ea susciperet liberos, et postea ex se natum sub titulo naturalis filii cum matre manumiserit: ignorantia mariti eiusdemque patris neque statui eorum, quos manumisisse visus est, officere debet, et exinde intellegi oportet remissum matri pignoris vinculum, ex quo de ea suscipere liberos optaverat: ideoque eam, quae postliminio reversa erat libera et ingenua, ingenuum peperisse constat. quod si publice praeda virtute militum reciperata nulli pretium matris pater numeraverit, protinus postliminio reversa non cum domino, sed cum marito fuisse declaratur. 1In civilibus dissensionibus quamvis saepe per eas res publica laedatur, non tamen in exitium rei publicae contenditur: qui in alterutras partes discedent, vice hostium non sunt eorum, inter quos iura captivitatium aut postliminiorum fuerint. et ideo captos et venumdatos posteaque manumissos placuit supervacuo repetere a principe ingenuitatem, quam nulla captivitate amiserant.
Ulpianus, Opinions, Book V. If anyone, after having ransomed a freeborn woman from the enemy, should keep her with him with the intention of having children by her, and afterwards manumits a child born from her, together with its mother, giving it the title of his natural son, the ignorance of the husband and father ought not to affect the condition of those whom he has appeared to manumit; and it should be understood that from the time that he made up his mind to have children by the mother, that the obligation of pledge to which she was liable is extinguished; and therefore it is established that she who returned under the right of postliminium was free and freeborn, and brought forth a freeborn child. Where, however, she was publicly taken as booty by the bravery of a soldier, and the father did not pay anyone money as her ransom, she is said, at the time of her return under the right of postliminium, not to have been with her master, but with her husband. 1Although the State is frequently injured by civil dissensions, still its destruction is not the object of the contest. Those who divide into different factions do not occupy the position of enemies between whom the rights of captivity and postliminium exist, and therefore persons who have been captured and sold, and afterwards manumitted, have been held to have fruitlessly demanded from the Emperor the right of free birth which they do not lose by captivity.
Dig. 50,13,3Idem libro quinto opinionum. Si medicus, cui curandos suos oculos qui eis laborabat commiserat, periculum amittendorum eorum per adversa medicamenta inferendo compulit, ut ei possessiones suas contra fidem bonam aeger venderet: incivile factum praeses provinciae coerceat remque restitui iubeat.
Ad Dig. 50,13,3Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. II, § 388, Note 15.The Same, Opinions, Book V. When a physician, who has been entrusted with the treatment of anyone’s eyes, administers drugs which may cause him to lose his eyesight, in order by doing so to force him to sell him his property, while he is ill, contrary to good faith, the Governor of the province must punish the unlawful act, and order the property to be restored.