[MARCIANUS libro quinto regularum. ] §37.4.15.prSi praeteritus filius emancipatus exceptionem doli mali agenti heredi patris opposuerit de eo quod patri debuit, non posse eum contra tabulas bonorum possessionem petere existimo: nam hoc ipso quasi repudiauit bonorum possessionem.
[MARCIANUS in the fifth book of Rules.] If an emancipated son who has been passed over has opposed an objection of fraud to the heir of his father who is bringing an action concerning what the son owed to his father, I think that he cannot claim the possession of goods contrary to the will; for by this very act he has, as it were, repudiated the possession of goods.
quod ita intellegendum est, si heredem petentem debitum noluerit filius repellere illa exceptione 'si non contra tabulas bonorum possessio filio dari potest', sed magis doli exceptione usus est.
This must be understood in such a way, if the son did not wish to repel the heir demanding the debt by that objection, "unless the possession of goods contrary to the will can be given to the son," but rather made use of the objection of fraud.