[ULPIANUS libro tertio decimo ad edictum. ] §26.7.25.prSi minoris actum fuerit cum tutoribus adsistentibus curatoribus et pupillus ob hoc egerit cum curatoribus et ei sint condemnati in id quod sua intererat minoris tutores culpa eorum condemnatos non esse: an restitutio aduersus tutores cesset? et Papinianus responsorum libro secundo ait nihilo minus posse restitui et idcirco curatores, si nondum iudicatum fecerunt, posse prouocantes per exceptionem doli consequi, ut eis mandentur aduersus tutores actiones.
[ULPIANUS in his thirteenth book on the Edict.] If an action on behalf of a minor was brought against his tutors, with the curators assisting, and because of this, the pupil brought an action against the curators, and they were condemned to the extent of the interest of the minor in that the tutors had not been condemned due to their negligence: does restitution against the tutors cease to be available? And Papinian, in the second book of his Opinions, says that restitution is nonetheless possible, and therefore the curators, if they have not yet satisfied the judgment, can, by raising an objection, through an objection of fraud, obtain that the actions against the tutors be assigned to them.
quid tamen si iam fecerunt iudicatum curatores? proderit hoc tutoribus, quoniam nihil minori abest, qui de praeda magis quam de damno sollicitus est, nisi forte mandare actiones paratus sit curatoribus.
What, however, if the curators have already satisfied the judgment? This will benefit the tutors, since nothing is missing for the minor, who is anxious about gain rather than about loss, unless perhaps he is prepared to assign the actions to the curators.