Quando ex facto tutoris vel curatoris minores agere vel conveniri possunt
(When Minors Can Sue or Be Sued on Account of the Acts of Their Guardians or Curators.)
1Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book XXIX. Aristo says that a ward who is in possession can have judgment rendered against him on account of the fraud or negligence of his guardian; but I do not think that the damages should be fixed at the amount to which the plaintiff will make oath in court. Nevertheless, this would be the case if the ward can recover the value of the property from his guardian.
2Ad Dig. 26,9,2Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 174, Note 9.Ulpianus, Opinions, Book I. Where a guardian or a curator lends the money of the minor whose affairs he is administering, and he himself makes the stipulation, or purchases land in his own name, an equitable action will be granted to the party to whom the money belongs, for its recovery, or for the collection of the loan.
3Papinianus, Questions, Book XX. The fraudulent acts of guardians can neither injure nor profit their wards. When it is commonly said that the fraud of a guardian cannot injure a ward, this means in case the latter is not pecuniarily benefited by the deceitful conduct of the guardian. Wherefore, Sabinus very reasonably holds that the ward can be sued in a tributorian action on account of fraud committed by his guardian; for instance, if he should favor the interest of his ward by means of an unjust distribution of property. The same rule applies in an action on deposit, and also in one claiming an estate, provided that it is proved that what the plaintiff lost through the fraud of the guardian was credited to the account of the ward.
4Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book LXIV. If, however, the guardian should commit any fraudulent act with reference to outside matters, the ward would sustain no injury.
5Papinianus, Opinions, Book V. After the death of an insane person an action to enforce a judgment will not be granted against a curator who administered his affairs, any more than against a guardian; provided that, after his office has been relinquished it is established that no renewal was made by his consent and the obligation transferred to either the curator or the guardian. 1Ad Dig. 26,9,5,1Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. II, § 482, Note 8.A guardian who binds himself to pay a sum of money for which judgment was rendered against the father of his ward, can legally refuse to do so, if an action is brought against him after the termination of his guardianship. It was decided that the same rule will not apply to the case where a guardian borrowed money in his own name, and with it paid a judgment for his ward, unless the creditor made the contract in order that the money might be used for the satisfaction of the judgment.
6The Same, Definitions, Book II. A guardian, in compliance with a decree of the Prætor, left an agent for the administration of the affairs of his ward. If judgment is rendered in favor of said agent, an action for its enforcement will be transferred to the ward, just as if the guardian himself had obtained it.
8The Same, Opinions, Book V. A guardian, who was at the same time the co-heir of his ward, had an action brought against him for the execution of a trust, and bound himself for payment in full. The question arose whether an equitable action should be granted against the ward, after he had reached the age of puberty, for the recovery of his share of the amount. The answer was that it should be granted.