[IULIANUS libro tertio ad Urseium Ferocem. ] §41.3.35.prSi homo, cuius usus fructus legatus erat, ab herede numquam possessus subreptus fuisset, quaesitum est, quia heres furti actionem non haberet, an usucapi possit.
[JULIANUS, On Urseius Ferox, book 3] If a slave, whose usufruct had been bequeathed, was stolen without ever having been possessed by the heir, it was asked whether he could be acquired by usucapion, since the heir did not have an action for theft.
Sabinus respondit nullam eius rei usucapionem esse, cuius nomine furti agi possit, agere autem furti eum, qui frui deberet, posse.
Sabinus replied that there is no usucapion of a thing on account of which an action for theft can be brought, and that he who ought to enjoy the usufruct can bring the action for theft.
quod si accipiendum est, ut fructuarius poterit uti frui: aliter enim homo in causa non perduceretur.
And this must be understood in the sense that the usufructuary will be able to use and enjoy; for otherwise the slave would not be restored to his former legal position.
sed si utenti iam et fruenti abductus homo fuerit, non solum ipse, sed etiam heres furti agere poterit.
But if the slave is taken away from someone who is already using and enjoying him, not only he himself but also the heir will be able to bring the action for theft.