[ULPIANUS libro quarto opinionum. ] §4.2.23.prNon est uerisimile compulsum in urbe inique indebitum soluisse eum, qui claram dignitatem se habere praetendebat, cum potuerit ius publicum inuocare et adire aliquem potestate praeditum, qui utique uim eum pati prohibuisset: sed huiusmodi praesumptioni debet apertissimas probationes uiolentiae opponere.
[ULPIANUS, Book IV of the Opinions.] It is not likely that a person who claimed to have an illustrious dignity, being compelled in the city, unjustly paid what was not due, since he could have invoked the public law and approached someone endowed with authority who would certainly have prevented him from suffering violence; but against a presumption of this kind, he must oppose the clearest proofs of violence.
§4.2.23.1Si iusto metu perterritus cognitionem, ad quam ut uinctus iret, potens aduersarius minabatur, id quod habere licebat compulsus uendidit, res suae aequitati per praesidem prouinciae restituatur.
If, terrified by a well-grounded fear because an influential adversary threatened a trial to which he would go as a prisoner, a person under compulsion sold what he was allowed to keep, the property should be restored to its equitable state by the governor of the province.
§4.2.23.2Si faenerator inciuiliter custodiendo athletam et a certaminibus prohibendo cauere compulerit ultra quantitatem debitae pecuniae, his probatis competens iudex rem suae aequitati restitui decernat.
If a money-lender, by unlawfully detaining an athlete and preventing him from competing, has compelled him to give security beyond the amount of the debt owed, then upon proof of these facts, the competent judge should decree that the matter be restored to its equitable state.
§4.2.23.3Si quis, quod aduersario non debebat, delegante eo per uim, apparitione praesidis interueniente, sine notione iudicis, coactus est dare, iudex inciuiliter extorta restitui ab eo, qui rei damnum praestiterit, iubeat.
If anyone, under compulsion, has given what he did not owe to his adversary, because the latter delegated it by force, with the intervention of the governor's official but without any judicial inquiry, the judge should order that what was unlawfully extorted be restored by the person who caused the damage to the property.
quod si debitis satisfecit simplici iussione et non cognitione habita, quamuis non extra ordinem exactionem fieri, sed ciuiliter oportuit, tamen quae solutioni debitarum ab eo quantitatium profecerunt, reuocare inciuile est.
But if he satisfied the debts by a simple order and without an inquiry being held, although the exaction ought not to have been made through extraordinary proceedings but in a civil manner, nevertheless it is contrary to law to revoke what went towards the payment of the amounts of the debts owed by him.