[IDEM libro decimo digestorum. ] §26.7.57.prChirographis debitorum incendio exustis cum ex inuentario tutores conuenire eos possent ad soluendam pecuniam aut nouationem faciendam cogere, cum idem circa priores debitores propter eundem casum fecissent, id omisissent circa debitores pupillorum, an, si quid propter hanc cessationem eorum pupilli damnum contraxerunt, iudicio tutelae consequantur? respondit, si adprobatum fuerit eos tutores hoc per dolum uel culpam praetermississe, praestari ab his hoc debere.
[IDEM libro decimo digestorum.] When the handwritten debt-acknowledgements of the debtors had been burnt in a fire, and the guardians could have sued them on the basis of the inventory to pay the money or forced them to make a novation, and although they had done the same regarding their own debtors on account of the same accident, they neglected to do so regarding the debtors of the wards; if the wards suffered any damage on account of this cessation of theirs, can they recover it by the action of guardianship? He answered that if it should be proved that the guardians neglected this through fraud or fault, they must make this good.
§26.7.57.1Ab eo, qui sententia praesidis bonis ademptis relegatus erat, cum ex permissu principis appellatio eius recepta sit, quam is qui pronuntiauerat non receperat, fundum emerat pupillus interuenientibus tutoribus et appellatione iniusta pronuntiata fundus ei ablatus est: quaesitum est, an tutelae iudicio pretium fundi pupillus consequi a tutoribus possit.
A ward, with the intervention of his guardians, had purchased a tract of land from a person who, by a sentence of the governor, had been relegated with the loss of his property, although by permission of the emperor his appeal had been received, which the person who had pronounced the sentence had not received. Subsequently, the appeal having been declared groundless, the land was taken away from him. The question arose whether the ward could recover the price of the land from the guardians by the action of guardianship.
respondit, si scientes emerunt ab eo, qui in ea causa esset, ut obnoxius sententiae priori esset, tutelae iudicio eos teneri.
He answered that if they purchased it knowing that he was in such a situation as to be subject to the prior sentence, they are held liable by the action of guardianship.