Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §13.5.31.pr

Debt Acknowledged under Mistake as to Inheritance and Restitution

Passage 2114 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

This section discusses whether a person who was deceived into acknowledging a debt after the debtor's death without being the actual heir can be sued by a civil action or the action for promised money, and whether interest paid can be recovered.

[SCAEUOLA libro quinto digestorum. ] §13.5.31.prLucius Titius Seiorum debitor decessit: hi persuaserunt Publio Maeuio, quod hereditas ad eum pertineret et fecerunt, ut epistulam in eos exponat debitorem sese esse quasi heredem patrui sui confitentem, qui et addidit epistulae suae, quod in rationes suas eadem pecunia peruenit.
[SCAEVOLA, from the fifth book of the Digests.] Lucius Titius, a debtor of the Seii, died. They persuaded Publius Maevius that the inheritance belonged to him, and caused him to issue a letter to them acknowledging that he was their debtor as if he were the heir of his paternal uncle; and he also added to his letter that the same money had come into his own accounts.
quaesitum est, cum ad Publium Maeuium ex hereditate Lucii Titi nihil peruenerit, an ex scriptura proposita de constituta pecunia conueniri possit et an doli exceptione uti possit.
It was asked, since nothing from the inheritance of Lucius Titius came to Publius Maevius, whether he could be sued on the basis of the produced document by the action for promised money, and whether he could employ the exception of fraud.
respondit nec ciuilem eo nomine actionem competere: sed nec de constituta secundum ea quae proponerentur.
He replied that neither a civil action was competent on that account, nor was the action for promised money, according to the facts proposed.
idem quaesiit, usurarum nomine quod ex causa supra scripta datum sit, an repeti possit.
The same person asked whether what was given under the head of interest for the reason written above could be recovered.
respondit secundum ea quae proponerentur posse.
He replied that according to the facts proposed it could.

Notes

  1. §13.5.31.prhi — Demonstrative pronoun (nominative plural masculine) referring to the preceding genitive plural Seiorum.
  2. §13.5.31.prfecerunt, ut ... exponat — The construction of facere ut + subjunctive denotes causation ('caused him to...'). Although the main verb fecerunt is perfect (past), the subordinate verb exponat is in the present subjunctive, which emphasizes the ongoing result of the action or reflects a historical present perspective.
  3. §13.5.31.prde constituta — Ellipsis for de constituta [pecunia actione]. Referring back to the previous de constituta pecunia and actionem, it denotes the action based on promised money (constituta pecunia).

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §13.5.31.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:13.5.31.pr

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.