Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §24.3.31.pr-24.3.31.4

Confiscation of Property and Dowry Rights Against Heirs

Passage 3623 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

This chunk addresses the wife's rights upon confiscation of the husband's property, the non-applicability of a dowry-reduction agreement to heirs, the assignment of judgment enforcement rights to the daughter, the effect of dotal payments by co-heirs on a conditional heir, and the right to sue for fruits and other accessions upon the return of dotal property.

[IDEM libro octauo decimo digestorum. ] §24.3.31.prSi marito publico iudicio damnato pars aliqua bonorum eius publicetur, fiscus creditoribus eius satisfacere necesse habet: inter quos uxor quoque est.
[THE SAME, Book 18 of the Digests.] If some part of his property is confiscated to the treasury after a husband has been condemned in a public trial, the treasury is obliged to satisfy his creditors, among whom the wife is also included.
§24.3.31.1Si pater, cum ducenta filiae suae nomine dotis gratia promississet, pactus fuerit, ne amplius quam centum a se peterentur, et soluto matrimonio egerit, centum, de quibus conuenit ne peterentur, nec intelleguntur dotis esse.
If a father, having promised two hundred as a dowry in the name of his daughter, agreed that no more than one hundred should be demanded from him, and brings an action after the dissolution of the marriage, the one hundred which it was agreed should not be demanded is not understood to be part of the dowry.
quod si mortuo patre cum herede eius maritus agere coeperit, ista quoque pecunia in dote erit.
But if, after the father's death, the husband begins to bring an action against his heir, this money also will be included in the dowry.
§24.3.31.2Si uoluntate filiae procurator a patre datus litem de dote contestatus fuerit et re secundum eum iudicata pater decesserit, iudicati actionem filiae potius quam heredibus patris dari oportebit.
If, with the consent of the daughter, a representative appointed by the father has joined issue in a lawsuit concerning the dowry, and after judgment was rendered in his favor, the father dies, the action on the judgment ought to be granted to the daughter rather than to the heirs of the father.
§24.3.31.3Cum patri dos data esset et ei filius ex aliqua parte heres sub condicione institutus fuerit et pendente condicione coheredes eius dotem pro sua portione mulieri soluerint: hoc minus filius ex dote praestare debebit, quoniam nullam actionem eius pecuniae reciperandae gratia aduersus coheredes habet.
When a dowry had been given to a father, and his son was appointed heir for a certain share under a condition, and while the condition was pending, his co-heirs paid the dowry to the woman in proportion to their shares, the son will be bound to perform so much less of the dowry, since he has no action against the co-heirs for the sake of recovering that money.
§24.3.31.4Si fundum dotalem recepisset mulier non habita ratione fructuum pro portione anni, quo nupta non fuisset, nihilo minus de dote agere potest, quia minorem dotem recepisset: hoc enim ad dotis augmentum pertinet, quemadmodum si partum ancillarum non recepisset, aut legata uel hereditates, quae post diuortium per seruos dotales adquisitae marito fuissent.
If a woman has received the dotal land without account being taken of the fruits in proportion to the part of the year during which she was not married, she can nevertheless bring an action concerning the dowry, because she would have received a smaller dowry; for this belongs to the increase of the dowry, just as if she had not received the offspring of female slaves, or legacies or inheritances which had been acquired for the husband after the divorce through dotal slaves.

Notes

  1. §24.3.31.1egerit — The subject of `egerit` is understood from the context to be the preceding `pater` (the father). It refers to the case where the father brings an action against the husband after the dissolution of the marriage, which is contrasted with the latter part where the husband is the plaintiff (`maritus agere coeperit`).
  2. §24.3.31.2re secundum eum iudicata — An ablative absolute construction. `secundum eum` is a legal idiom meaning "in his favor," where `eum` refers to the representative (`procurator`) appointed by the father.
  3. §24.3.31.3hoc minus — `hoc` is an ablative of measure of difference ("by so much"), modifying the comparative adverb `minus`, meaning "by so much less."
  4. §24.3.31.4non habita ratione — An ablative absolute with negation, literally "no account having been taken of," meaning "without taking into account."

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §24.3.31.pr-24.3.31.4. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:24.3.31.pr-24.3.31.4

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.