Ad Ferocem libri
Ex libro IV
Julianus, On Urseius Ferox. Where a man leaves two agents to attend to all his business, unless he expressly states that one is to bring suit against the other for money, it cannot be maintained that such a mandate was given to either of them.
Julianus, On Urseius Ferox, Book IV. For whenever no one will undertake the defence of the son of a family on account of a breach of the law, an action is granted against him,
Ad Dig. 11,1,18Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 118, Note 6.Julianus, On Urseius Ferox, Book IV. Where a person who was heir to half of an estate wished to defend his absent co-heir, and, in order to avoid the burden of furnishing security, answered that he was the sole heir, and judgment was rendered against him; the plaintiff asked whether, as the party was insolvent, the former judgment could not be rescinded, and an action be granted him who was really the heir. Proculus answered that the judgment could be rescinded and the action be brought, and this is correct.
The Same, On Urseius Ferox, Book IV. If a woman has become surety for me to Titius, in violation of the Velleian Decree of the Senate, and Titius sues her for the money which I have paid her, she cannot avail herself of the exception based on the Decree of the Senate, for she was in no danger of losing the money, since she already has it in her possession. 1If I have accepted a surety for a woman who has bound herself in violation of the Decree of the Senate, Gaius Cassius answered that an exception should be granted to the said surety, only to the extent that the woman had asked him to be responsible for her. Julianus, however, thinks very properly than an exception should be granted to the surety, even though he is not entitled to an action on mandate against the woman; for the reason that the Senate disapproves of the entire obligation, and the liability of the former debtor to the creditor is reestablished by the Prætor.
Julianus, On Urseius Ferox, Book IV. A replication alleging bad faith should not be pleaded against an exception founded upon an oath taken in court, as the Prætor should see that no question is subsequently raised with reference to such an oath.
Julianus, On Urseius Ferox, Book IV. If property should be stolen from a son under paternal control, he can properly bring an action for this cause after he becomes the head of a household. Where property which has been leased to him has been stolen, he can also bring an action on this account, after he becomes independent.