Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §49.4.2.pr-49.4.2.3

Appeal Deadlines for Procurators and Interested Parties

Passage 8500 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

This chunk discusses whether the time limit for an appeal should be treated as for one's own case (two days) or another's case (three days) when appealed by a defeated procurator, an interested third party, a father, or a closely connected person.

[MACER libro primo de appellationibus. ] §49.4.2.prSi procuratorio nomine egeris et uictus appellaueris, deinde iniusta appellatio tua fuerit pronuntiata, potest dubitari, num secundo die appellare debeas, quia, cum de tua appellatione iniusta pronuntiatum sit, tua interfuisse uidetur.
[MACER, Book 1 On Appeals.] If you have litigated in the capacity of a procurator and, having been defeated, have appealed, and then your appeal has been pronounced unjust, it can be doubted whether you ought to appeal on the second day; because, since a pronouncement was made that your appeal was unjust, it seems to have concerned your interest.
sed rectius dicetur tertia die appellare te posse, quia nihilo minus alienam causam defenderis.
But it will be more correctly said that you can appeal on the third day, because you have nonetheless defended another's case.
§49.4.2.1Sed si alius, quam qui iudicio expertus est, appellet, qualis est cuius interest, an etiam tertia die appellare possit, uideamus.
But if someone other than the one who took part in the trial appeals, such as one who has an interest, let us see whether he can appeal even on the third day.
sed dicendum est secunda die appellare eum debere, quia uerum est eum suam causam defendere.
But it must be said that he ought to appeal on the second day, because it is true that he is defending his own case.
contrarium ei est, si dicat idcirco sibi licere intra triduum appellare, quia uidetur quasi alieno nomine appellare, quando, si uelit causam suam alienam uideri, semet ipsum excludit, quia in aliena causa ei, qui iudicio expertus non est, appellare non liceat.
It is contrary to this if he should say that he is allowed to appeal within three days on the ground that he seems to appeal as if in another's name; for, if he wishes his own case to appear as another's, he excludes himself, because in another's case, a person who did not take part in the trial is not allowed to appeal.
§49.4.2.2Si is, qui ex libertinitate in ingenuitatem se defendebat, uictus appellare omiserit, an pater eius appellare possit, maxime si dicat eum in potestate sua esse, quaeritur.
If a person who was defending himself from the status of a freedman to that of freeborn, having been defeated, has omitted to appeal, it is asked whether his father can appeal, especially if he says that the person is in his power.
sed si potest, quod magis probatur, secunda die, ut propria causa, appellare debet.
But if he can (which is more approved), he ought to appeal on the second day, as in his own case.
§49.4.2.3Si pro eo, qui capite puniri iussus est, necessaria persona appellet, an tertia die audiri possit, Paulus dubitat.
If a person closely connected appeals on behalf of someone who has been ordered to be punished with death, Paulus doubts whether he can be heard on the third day.
sed dicendum est hanc quoque personam ut in propria causa secunda die appellare debere, quia qui sua interesse dicit, propriam causam defendit.
But it must be said that this person also ought to appeal on the second day, as in his own case, because he who says it concerns his interest defends his own case.

Notes

  1. §49.4.2.prtua — The impersonal verb `interest` (here as the perfect infinitive `interfuisse`) takes the feminine ablative singular of the possessive pronoun (`tua`) instead of the genitive to express the person whom it concerns, meaning 'to concern your own interest'.
  2. §49.4.2.1alius, quam qui iudicio expertus est — `alius quam` expresses 'someone other than'. Here, `qui iudicio expertus est` ('the one who took part in the trial') serves as the object of comparison, referring to someone other than the person who actually participated as a party in the lawsuit.
  3. §49.4.2.3sua — Similar to `tua` in `§49.4.2.pr`, this is the feminine ablative singular of the possessive pronoun used with the impersonal verb `interest`. Since it refers back to the subject of the clause (`qui`), the reflexive possessive adjective `sua` is used.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §49.4.2.pr-49.4.2.3. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:49.4.2.pr-49.4.2.3

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.