[ULPIANUS libro trigesimo quarto ad edictum. ] §25.2.15.prNihil interest, utrum simul an separatim habitauerunt, cum actio rerum amotarum competat etiam aduersus eam, quae ex ea domo subtraxit, in qua non simul cum uiro habitauit.
[ULPIANUS, On the Edict, book 34.] It makes no difference whether they lived together or separately, since the action for removed property is available even against a woman who has purloined things from that house in which she did not live together with her husband.
§25.2.15.1Uxor et nurus et pronurus uiro et socero et prosocero furtum facere possunt, furti autem non tenentur.
A wife, a daughter-in-law, and a granddaughter-in-law can commit theft against a husband, a father-in-law, and a grandfather-in-law, but they are not held liable for theft.
nisi forte emancipatus sit filius: tunc enim nurus patri eius et furtum facit et furti tenetur.
Unless by chance the son has been emancipated; for then the daughter-in-law both commits theft against his father and is held liable for theft.