Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §42.1.27.pr

Action for Execution of an Unlawful Judgment After an Irregular Appeal

Passage 6879 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

In a case where an unlawful judgment for compound interest by a provincial governor was followed by an irregular appeal, Modestinus responds that if the judgment specifies a certain sum, there is no obstacle to bringing an action for its execution.

[MODESTINUS libro primo responsorum. ] §42.1.27.prPraeses prouinciae usuras usurarum condemnauit contra leges et sacras constitutiones ideoque Lucius Titius contra prolatam sententiam iniustam praesidis appellauit: quaero, cum non secundum legem Titius prouocasset, an exigi possit pecunia secundum condemnationem.
[MODESTINUS, in the first book of Responses.] The governor of a province condemned a person to pay compound interest, contrary to the laws and imperial constitutions, and therefore Lucius Titius appealed against the unjust sentence rendered by the governor. I ask whether, since Titius did not appeal in accordance with the law, the money can be exacted in accordance with the condemnation.
Modestinus respondit, si sententiae certa quantitas continetur, nihil proponi, cur iudicati agi non possit.
Modestinus replied that, if a specific sum is contained in the judgment, nothing is presented why an action on the judgment cannot be brought.

Notes

  1. §42.1.27.priudicati agi — iudicati is the genitive of iudicatum (judgment, decided matter). iudicati agere is a legal idiom meaning "to bring an action on a judgment" (actio iudicati), here appearing with the passive infinitive agi to mean "for an action on the judgment to be brought." The phrase nihil proponi is the subject of the accusative-with-infinitive (A.C.I.) construction governed by Modestinus respondit, indicating that nothing is presented to prevent execution.
  2. §42.1.27.prprouocasset — A syncopated form of prouocavisset (subjunctive pluperfect active third-person singular). Used in the cum-clause to express the past factual premise that the appeal (provocare) by Lucius Titius had not been made in accordance with the law (secundum legem).

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §42.1.27.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:42.1.27.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.