Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §4.2.17.pr

Liability of Heirs Having Consumed Property Acquired by Duress

Passage 655 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

Discussing whether an heir who has consumed property acquired by intimidation, or their own heir, remains liable, and concluding that once the property has come to the immediate heir, the action is perpetual and lies against them and their successors in any event.

[PAULUS libro primo quaestionum. ] §4.2.17.prUideamus ergo, si heres, ad quem aliquid peruenerit, consumpserit id quod peruenit, an desinat teneri, an uero sufficit semel peruenisse? et, si consumpto eo decesserit, utrum aduersus heredem eius omnimodo competit actio, quoniam hereditariam suscepit obligationem, an non sit danda, quoniam ad secundum heredem nihil peruenit? et melius est omnimodo competere in heredem heredis actionem: sufficit enim semel peruenisse ad proximum heredem, et perpetua actio esse coepit: alioquin dicendum erit nec ipsum, qui consumpsit quod ad eum peruenit, teneri.
[PAULUS, Questions, Book I.] Let us therefore see, if an heir to whom something has come has consumed what came to him, whether he ceases to be liable, or whether it is enough that it has once come to him. And, if he dies after having consumed it, whether an action lies against his heir in any event, since the latter has assumed an hereditary obligation, or whether it should not be granted, since nothing came to the second heir? And it is better that the action should lie against the heir of the heir in any event; for it is enough that it has once come to the immediate heir, and the action has begun to be perpetual: otherwise it will have to be said that even the person himself who consumed what came to him is not liable.

Notes

  1. §4.2.17.pruideamus ergo, si heres, ad quem aliquid peruenerit, consumpserit id quod peruenit, an desinat teneri, an uero sufficit semel peruenisse — In the double indirect question (`an desinat... an uero sufficit...`) introduced by the main verb `uideamus`, the subjunctive (`desinat`) is used in the first clause, while the indicative (`sufficit`) is used in the second. The verb `consumpserit` in the conditional clause is in the perfect tense (either future perfect indicative or perfect subjunctive), indicating a hypothetical event prior to the main action.
  2. §4.2.17.prmelius est omnimodo competere in heredem heredis actionem — An accusative with infinitive (A.C.I.) construction introduced by the impersonal expression `melius est` ('it is better'). The accusative `actionem` ('the action') serves as the subject of the infinitive `competere` ('to lie/be competent'), which is qualified by `in heredem heredis` ('against the heir of the heir').
  3. §4.2.17.prdicendum erit nec ipsum, qui consumpsit quod ad eum peruenit, teneri — An accusative with infinitive construction introduced by the gerundive used impersonally `dicendum erit` ('it will have to be said'). The negative accusative `nec ipsum` ('not even the person himself') serves as the subject of the passive infinitive `teneri` ('to be held liable/bound'), while the relative clause starting with `qui` modifies `ipsum`, creating a nested structure.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §4.2.17.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:4.2.17.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.