Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §29.2.40.pr

Pupillary Substitute's Intermeddling and Liability

Passage 4443 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

This section addresses whether a person designated as a pupillary substitute who intermeddles with the pupillary inheritance after rejecting the father's inheritance is liable to the father's creditors, presenting the opinions of Julian and Marcellus.

[IDEM libro quarto disputationum. ] §29.2.40.prQuaesitum est, an, licet quis paternae hereditatis nihil attingat, aliquid tamen propter patris uoluntatem habeat uel faciat, an creditoribus paternis cogatur respondere: ut puta si impuberi fuerit substitutus.
[THE SAME, in the fourth book of Disputations.] The question was asked, whether, although someone does not touch anything of his father's inheritance, but nevertheless holds or does something on account of his father's will, he is compelled to answer to his father's creditors; for example, if he has been substituted for a youth under puberty.
in qua specie Iulianus libro uicesimo sexto digestorum scripsit incidere eum in edictum, si se immiscuerit impuberis hereditati: nam qui iudicium parentis oppugnauerit, non debet ex eadem hereditate quicquam consequi.
In this case, Julian wrote in the twenty-sixth book of his Digests that he falls under the Edict if he has intermeddled with the inheritance of the youth under puberty; for he who has opposed the judgment of his parent ought not to obtain anything from the same inheritance.
sed Marcellus eleganter distinguit multum interesse, utrum ex asse fuerit institutus in patris testamento an ex parte, ut, si ex parte, potuerit sine metu remota patris successione impuberis hereditatem amplecti.
But Marcellus elegantly distinguishes that it makes a great difference whether he was instituted heir to the whole estate in his father's will or only to a part, so that, if to a part, he could, without fear, accept the inheritance of the youth under puberty, while the succession to the father has been set aside.

Notes

  1. §29.2.40.pran, licet... habeat uel faciat, an... cogatur — The indirect question governed by `Quaesitum est` ('it was asked') has a double indirect question structure `an... an...` ('whether... or whether...'). The structure is complex due to the concession clause `licet... attingat` ('although... touch') inserted in between.
  2. §29.2.40.prremota patris successione — Ablative absolute construction. Composed of the perfect passive participle `remota` of the verb `removeo` ('to set aside', 'to reject') and the noun `successione` ('succession'), meaning 'the succession of the father having been set aside (i.e. rejected)'.
  3. §29.2.40.prex asse... ex parte — Technical legal terms in Roman law regarding inheritance shares. `ex asse` (derived from `as`, the unit representing the whole) means 'for the whole estate' (as sole heir), while `ex parte` means 'for a part' (as co-heir).

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §29.2.40.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:29.2.40.pr

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.