[IDEM libro quarto decimo ad edictum. ] §5.3.7.prSi quis libertatem ex testamento sibi competisse dicat, non debebit iudex de libertate sententiam dicere, ne praeiudicium de testamento cognituro faciat: et ita senatus censuit: sed et diuus Traianus rescripsit differendum de libertate iudicium, donec de inofficioso iudicium aut inducatur aut finem accipiat. §5.3.7.1Ita demum autem sustinentur liberalia iudicia, si iam de inofficioso iudicium contestatum est: ceterum si non contestetur, non exspectantur liberalia iudicia: et ita diuus Pius rescripsit.
[THE SAME, in the fourteenth book on the Edict.]\n\nIf anyone should claim that freedom belongs to him under a will, the judge ought not to pronounce judgment on freedom, lest he create a prejudice for the person who is to investigate the will; and so the Senate decreed. But the Divine Trajan also wrote in a rescript that the trial concerning freedom must be postponed until the trial concerning the undutiful will is either brought or comes to an end.\n\nBut trials concerning freedom are stayed only if joinder of issue has already taken place in the trial concerning the undutiful will; otherwise, if issue is not joined, trials concerning freedom are not delayed; and so the Divine Pius wrote in a rescript.
nam cum quidam Licinnianus de statu suo quaestionem patiebatur et, ne maturius pronuntiaretur de condicione sua, nolebat ad liberale iudicium ire, dicens suscepturum se de inofficioso testamento iudicium et petiturum hereditatem, quia libertatem et hereditatem ex testamento sibi defendebat: diuus Pius ait, si quidem possessor esset hereditatis Licinnianus, facilius audiendum, quoniam esset hereditatis nomine iudicium suscepturus et erat in arbitrio eius, qui se dominum esse dicit, agere de inofficioso testamento iudicium.
For when a certain Licinnianus was undergoing an inquiry concerning his status and, lest judgment be pronounced prematurely concerning his condition, did not wish to go to the trial concerning freedom, saying that he would undertake the trial concerning the undutiful will and claim the inheritance, because he defended both his freedom and the inheritance for himself under the will: the Divine Pius said that if indeed Licinnianus were the possessor of the inheritance, he should be heard more readily, since he would have to undertake the trial in the name of the inheritance, and it was in the power of the person who claimed to be the owner to bring the trial concerning the undutiful will.
nunc uero sub obtentu iudicii de inofficioso testamento ab ipso Licinniano non suscepti per quinquennium non debere moram fieri seruituti.
But now, under the pretext of a trial concerning the undutiful will not undertaken by Licinnianus himself, delay ought not to be caused to servitude for five years.
plane summatim aestimandum iudici concessit, an forte bona fide imploretur iudicium de testamento: et si id depraehenderit, praestituendum modicum tempus, intra quod si non fuerit contestatum, iubeat iudicem libertatis partibus suis fungi. §5.3.7.2Quotiens autem quis patitur controuersiam libertatis et hereditatis, sed se non ex testamento liberum dicit, sed alias uel a uiuo testatore manumissum, non debere impediri liberalem causam, licet iudicium de testamento moueri speretur, diuus Pius rescripsit: adiecit plane in rescripto, dummodo praedicatur iudici liberalis causae, ne ullum adminiculum libertatis ex testamento admittat.
He clearly allowed the judge to estimate summarily whether by chance the trial concerning the will is being sought in good faith; and if he should detect this, a moderate time must be prescribed, within which if issue has not been joined, he should order the judge of freedom to perform his own duties.\n\nMoreover, as often as anyone undergoes a dispute over freedom and inheritance, but does not say that he is free under the will, but by another means or manumitted by the testator during his lifetime, the Divine Pius wrote in a rescript that the case concerning freedom ought not to be impeded, although a trial concerning the will is expected to be moved; he clearly added in the rescript, provided that it is declared to the judge of the case concerning freedom that he should not admit any support of freedom from the will.