[IDEM libro secundo ad Plautium. ] §11.1.13.prConfessionibus falsis respondentes ita obligantur, si eius nomine, de quo quis interrogatus sit, cum aliquo sit actio, quia quae cum alio actio esset, si dominus esset, in nosmet confessione nostra conferimus.
[THE SAME, from the second book on Plautius.] Those who answer with false confessions are held liable only if there is an action with someone in the name of the person about whom one was interrogated; because we transfer to ourselves by our own confession the action which would lie against another, if he were the owner.
et si eum, qui in potestate patris esset, respondissem filium meum esse, ita me obligari, si aetas eius pateretur, ut filius meus esse possit, quia falsae confessiones naturalibus conuenire deberent.
And if I have answered that a person who was under the power of his father is my son, I am held liable only if his age allows him to be my son, because false confessions must agree with natural facts.
propter quae fiat, ut patris familias nomine respondendo non obliger.
Consequently, it happens that I am not held liable by answering in the name of a paterfamilias.
§11.1.13.1Eum, qui patrem familias suum esse responderit seruum, non teneri noxali actione: ac ne, si bona fide liber homo mihi seruiat, mecum noxali iudicio agi potest et, si actum fuerit, manebit integra actio cum ipso qui admisit.
A person who has answered that a paterfamilias is his slave is not held liable by a noxal action; and indeed, even if a free person serves me in good faith, no noxal action can be brought against me, and if it is brought, the action will remain intact against the person who actually committed the wrong.