Ulpianus, On the Office of Consul, Book III. The Divine Marcus stated in a Rescript to Eutychianus that, “The judges will determine whether you can obtain what you desire, after those who may object have been produced before them, that is to say, those who might be injured by the confirmation of the adoption”.

The Same, On the Duties of Consul, Book III. The Emperors Severus and Antoninus stated the following in a Rescript: “Since the question arises whether anything is due to you from guardians or curators, your petition is unreasonable, as you desire them to furnish the money to you for the expenses of the suit.”

Ulpianus, On the Duties of Consul, Book III. It was stated by the Divine Pius in a Rescript addressed to the magistrates of the Roman people, that those who appoint judges or arbitrators must authorize the execution of the judgments rendered by them. 1Our Emperor and his Father stated in a Rescript that even the Governor of a province could execute a judgment pronounced at Rome, if he was directed to do so. 2Hence, in the judicial sale of anything which has been taken in execution, movable property, such as animals, must first be sold. If the price of this is sufficient to satisfy the claim, well and good; if it is not, then the real property should be ordered to be taken in execution and sold. Where, however, there is no movable property, the land must be levied upon and sold, in the beginning. Courts are accustomed to decide that, if there is no movable property, the land must be taken into execution, for it is not usual in the beginning to take the land. If the land is not sufficient to pay the debt, or the debtor has none, then any credits which he may have are taken in execution and sold. It is thus that the Governors of provinces execute judgment. 3If property taken in execution does not find a purchaser, it was stated in a Rescript by our Emperor and his Divine Father that it shall be adjudged to him in whose favor the decision against the party who lost the case was rendered. The property is adjudged to him in proportion to the amount which is due, for if the creditor prefers to accept it in satisfaction of his claim he must be content with it, and the Rescript states that he cannot demand any more than he is entitled to; because, if he is content with the property taken in execution, he is considered as having made an agreement for the satisfaction of his claim; nor can he say that he held the property in pledge for a certain amount and bring an action to recover the balance. 4If a controversy arises concerning property taken in execution, it has been decided by our Emperor that those who are executing the judgment shall make an examination of it, and if they ascertain that it belongs to the party who was defeated, they must execute the judgment. It must, however, be noted that they are obliged to make this examination summarily; nor can their decision prejudice the debtor, if they think that the property should be released as belonging to the party who raised the controversy, and not to him in whose name it was taken in execution; nor should he to whom it is delivered be immediately entitled to it by virtue of the decree, if the property is such that it can be recovered from him in the ordinary course of law. Hence, the result is that the matter will remain in its original condition and the property affected by the judgment can only benefit the aforesaid party by usucaption. It must, however, be said that where a dispute arises with reference to what has been taken in execution it should be relinquished, and other property be taken with respect to which no controversy exists. 5Ad Dig. 42,1,15,5Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 241, Note 5.Let us see, if the property taken in execution has been pledged, whether it can be sold, so that the creditor having been satisfied, any remainder can be applied to the judgment. And, although a creditor cannot be compelled to sell property which he received by way of pledge, it can, however, be kept until execution on the judgment is issued, and if the property seized should find a purchaser, who, after the creditor has been satisfied, is ready to pay any balance remaining, the sale of this property also may be allowed. It is not held that the condition of the creditor becomes any worse, as he has obtained that to which he was entitled, nor should his right of pledge be released before his claim has been satisfied. 6If, after the property taken in execution has been adjudged, any controversy arises with reference to the purchaser, let us see whether the magistrate who executed the judgment will have jurisdiction of the matter. I do not think that there is any ground for further inquiry, as, when the purchase has once been perfected, he who bought the property must assume the risk; and certainly, after the purchaser has been given possession, the duty of the judge is at an end. The same rule will apply, if the property is adjudged to him in favor of whom the decision was rendered. 7If the purchaser to whom the property was adjudged by the court does not pay the price, let us see whether the magistrates, whose duty it is to execute the judgment, should call him to account. I do not think that they can go any farther, otherwise the proceedings would become interminable. But what can we say in a case of this kind? Shall they render judgment against the purchaser, and issue execution against him? Or shall they immediately consider the case as decided? And what must be done if the purchaser denies that he bought the property, or alleges that he has paid for it? The better opinion will be for the judge not to interfere, and especially since the party in whose favor the judgment was rendered has no right of action against him who obtains the property, and besides suffers no wrong; as it is necessary for property taken in execution and sold to be paid for in cash, and not that the money shall be paid after a certain time. And, indeed, if the court should interfere, it ought only to do so to the extent of taking and selling the property which had been adjudged, just as if it had not been released from the lien of the judgment. 8Magistrates can also execute a judgment by taking the claims of the debtor, if there is nothing else subject to execution, for our Emperor stated in a Rescript that a promissory note could be taken in execution. 9But let us see whether only a credit which is acknowledged by the debtor can be levied on, or whether this can be done if he denies his liability. The better opinion is, that only that should be levied on which he admits to be due. If, however, he should deny that he owes the claim, it would be perfectly proper not to include it; unless someone, following the example of the seizure of movable property, should proceed still farther, and say that the judges themselves ought to make an investigation of the claim, as they do in the case of other personal effects, but it is stated differently in a rescript. 10Ad Dig. 42,1,15,10Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 239, Note 9.Again, what shall we say where the judges themselves take action with reference to the claim, and require the amount of the debt to be paid on the judgment; or if they should sell the claim, as they are accustomed to do, where other personal property is taken in execution? It is necessary that they should do whatever seems to them best in order to execute the judgment. 11If the party against whom the judgment is rendered has money deposited with bankers, it can also be taken into execution. And further, if there is any money in the hands of anyone else, which should be paid to the party who lost the case, it is customary to levy on it, and apply it to the payment of the judgment. 12Moreover, money which has been deposited with anyone for safe-keeping, or placed in a chest for the same purpose, can be levied on for the purpose of satisfying a judgment. Again, where money belonging to a ward has been placed in a chest for the purchase of land, it can be taken by the judge charged with the execution of the judgment, without the permission of the Prætor, and employed for the payment of the claim.

Ulpianus, On the Duties of Proconsul, Book III. When persons who have been appointed to public offices appeal, and do not establish a justification for doing so, they are hereby notified that it is at their risk if the State should suffer any loss by reason of the appeal being delayed. When it is apparent that the appeal was necessary, the Governor of the province, or the Emperor, shall decide who was responsible for the damage sustained.

The Same, On the Duties of Consul, Book III. When anyone who has been created a municipal magistrate refuses to perform the duties of his office, he can be compelled to do so by the Governor in the same manner as guardians can be forced to discharge the duties of the trust imposed upon them.

The Same, On the Duties of Proconsul, Book III. The Divine Brothers made the following statement in a Rescript with reference to promises made to cities of which judges should take cognizance: “Statius Rufinus promised that he would finish a theatre in the City of Gabinia, which he already had begun. For although he had suffered misfortune, and had been relegated by the Urban Prefect for the term of three years; still he should not diminish the favor of the gift which he had voluntarily offered, as, even though he was absent, the work could be completed by a friend. If, however, he should fail to do so, the regular authorities who had the legal right to act in behalf of the city could bring suit against him in its name. The judges must examine the case as soon as possible, before Statius Rufinus went into exile, and if they should determine that the work ought to be completed by him, they shall order him to fulfil the promise made to the city, or forbid the land which he has in the territory of the City of Gabinia to be sold.”