[ULPIANUS libro sexto ad edictum. ] §3.2.6.pr'Furti' accipe siue manifesti siue nec manifesti.
[ULPIANUS, in his Sixth Book on the Edict.] "Of theft" understand as either manifest or non-manifest.
§3.2.6.1Sed si furti uel aliis famosis actionibus quis condemnatus prouocauit, pendente iudicio nondum inter famosos habetur: si autem omnia tempora prouocationis lapsa sunt, retro infamis est: quamuis si iniusta appellatio eius uisa sit, hodie notari puto, non retro notatur.
But if someone, having been condemned in an action for theft or in other infamous actions, has appealed, while the judgment is pending, he is not yet held among the infamous. If, however, all the time limits for appeal have lapsed, he is infamous retroactively; although, if his appeal is deemed unjust, I think he is marked today, not marked retroactively.
§3.2.6.2Si quis alieno nomine condemnatus fuerit, non laborat infamia: et ideo nec procurator meus uel defensor uel tutor uel curator uel heres furti uel ex alia simili specie condemnatus infamia notabuntur, nec ego, si ab initio per procuratorem causa agitata est.
If someone has been condemned in another's name, he does not suffer infamy; and therefore, neither my procurator, nor defender, nor tutor, nor curator, nor heir, if condemned for theft or in another similar category, will be marked with infamy, nor will I, if from the beginning the case was conducted through a procurator.
§3.2.6.3'Pactusue' inquit 'erit': pactum sic accipimus, si cum pretio quantocumque pactus est: alioquin et qui precibus inpetrauit ne secum ageretur erit notatus nec erit ueniae ulla ratio, quod est inhumanum.
The edict says "or who has settled": we understand "settlement" in this way, if he has settled for some price, however small; otherwise, even he who by entreaties obtained that an action should not be brought against him will be marked, and there will be no ground for indulgence, which is inhuman.
§3.2.6.4Qui iussu praetoris pretio dato pactus est, non notatur.
He who, by order of the praetor, has settled upon giving a price is not marked.
sed et si iureiurando delato iurauerit quis se non deliquisse, non erit notatus: nam quodammodo innocentiam suam iureiurando adprobauit.
But also if, upon the oath being tendered, someone has sworn that he did not commit the offense, he will not be marked; for in a way he has proved his innocence by the oath.
§3.2.6.5'Mandati condemnatus': uerbis edicti notatur non solum qui mandatum suscepit, sed et is, qui fidem, quam aduersarius secutus est, non praestat.
"Condemned on mandate": by the words of the edict, not only he who undertook the mandate is marked, but also he who does not perform the trust which the adversary relied upon.
ut puta fideiussi pro te et solui: mandati te si condemnauero, famosum facio.
For example, I became surety for you and paid; if I condemn you on mandate, I make you infamous.
§3.2.6.6Illud plane addendum est, quod interdum et heres suo nomine damnatur et ideo infamis fit, si in deposito uel in mandato male uersatus sit: non tamen in tutela uel pro socio heres suo nomine damnari potest, quia heres neque in tutelam neque in societatem succedit, sed tantum in aes alienum defuncti.
It must clearly be added that sometimes even an heir is condemned in his own name and thereby becomes infamous, if he has behaved dishonestly in a deposit or a mandate; however, in guardianship or in a partnership action, an heir cannot be condemned in his own name, because the heir succeeds neither to the guardianship nor to the partnership, but only to the debts of the deceased.
§3.2.6.7Contrario iudicio damnatus non erit infamis: nec immerito.
He who is condemned in a contrary action will not be infamous; and not without reason.
nam in contrariis non de perfidia agitur, sed de calculo, qui fere iudicio solet dirimi.
For in contrary actions, it is not a question of perfidy, but of calculation, which is usually resolved by a judgment.