[ULPIANUS libro undecimo ad edictum. ] §4.2.16.prQuod diximus si plures metum admiserunt, idem dicendum erit et si ad alium res peruenit, alter metum adhibuit.
[ULPIANUS, on the Edict, Book XI.] What we have said in the case where several persons have committed intimidation must also be said if the thing has come to one person, while another employed the intimidation.
§4.2.16.1Sed si serui metum adhibuerint, noxalis quidem actio ipsorum nomine erit, poterit autem quis dominum ad quem res peruenerit conuenire: qui conuentus siue rem siue secundum quod iam dictum est quadruplum praestiterit, proderit et seruis.
But if slaves have employed intimidation, a noxal action will indeed lie in their name, but one will also be able to sue the master to whom the thing has come; and if this master, having been sued, either restores the thing or, in accordance with what has already been said, pays fourfold, this will also benefit the slaves.
si uero noxali conuentus maluerit noxae dedere, nihilo minus ipse poterit conueniri, si ad eum res peruenerit.
If, however, when sued in a noxal action, he prefers to surrender them as noxa, he can nevertheless be sued himself, if the thing has come to him.
§4.2.16.2Haec actio heredi ceterisque successoribus datur, quoniam rei habet persecutionem.
This action is granted to the heir and other successors, since it has the pursuit of the thing.
in heredem autem et ceteros in id, quod peruenit ad eos, datur non inmerito: licet enim poena ad heredem non transeat, attamen quod turpiter uel scelere quaesitum est, ut est et rescriptum, ad compendium heredis non debet pertinere.
On the other hand, it is granted against the heir and others to the extent of what has come to them, and not without reason: for although a penalty does not pass to the heir, nevertheless what was acquired basely or criminally, as has also been stated in a rescript, ought not to turn to the profit of the heir.