[ULPIANUS libro septimo disputationum. ] §2.15.7.prEt post rem iudicatam transactio ualet, si uel appellatio intercesserit uel appellare potueris. §2.15.7.1Si fideiussor conuentus et condemnatus fuisset, mox reus transegisset cum eo, cui erat fideiussor condemnatus: an transactio ualeat quaeritur: et puto ualere, quasi omni causa et aduersus reum et aduersus fideiussorem dissoluta.
[ULPIAN in the seventh book of disputations.] after a matter has been adjudged, a compromise is valid, if either an appeal has been interposed or you could have appealed. a guarantor had been sued and condemned, and subsequently the principal debtor had compromised with the person to whom the guarantor had been condemned, it is asked whether the compromise is valid; and I think it is valid, as if every cause of action both against the principal debtor and against the guarantor were dissolved.
si tamen ipse fideiussor condemnatus transegit, etsi transactio non peremit rem iudicatam, tamen eo quod datum est releuari rem iudicatam oportet. §2.15.7.2Usque adeo autem quod datum est etiamsi non proficit ad transactionem, extenuat tamen rem iudicatam, ut inde sit et dictum et rescriptum circa alimentorum transactionem citra praetoris auctoritatem factam, ut quod datum est proficiat ad alimenta: ita ut, si quid amplius ex causa alimentorum deberi potest, id praestetur, quod autem datum est, imputetur.
If, however, the condemned guarantor himself compromised, although the compromise does not destroy the adjudged matter, yet the adjudged matter ought to be lightened by that which was given., that which was given, even if it does not avail for a compromise, lightens the adjudged matter to such an extent that it has been both said and stated in a rescript concerning a compromise of alimony made without the authority of the praetor, that what was given should avail for the alimony; so that, if anything more can be owed on account of the alimony, it may be performed, and what was given may be imputed.