[Liber sextus Decretalium]

a On distinguished places. Some say that the definition where it follows immediately does not refer except to what it says "in distinguished places." It is sufficient that it is a city, even if experts are not there, and the reason is that usually in cities there are experts, and legal experts do not look to things that happen rarely, nor do they treat those things, but only those that occur frequently. In the Authentics, "That without," etc. According to the argument, 4th Distinction, "Judge," Digest, On legacies, law "For those," for it is true that in a city or there, experts might not be held. Hence there is enough of a supply of them to be had in a city. On the sale of things, "Which religious," 8th question, 1, "Pontiffs." Others contradicting that the same reason is there as pleased Innocent and the Ostian. According to this, expound what follows: "where," in which distinguished places. And it makes for this part, as above, section "In nothing."

a. i. a. note study does not mean a village or a castle - it does not rest.
the last says that if the definition
yours

or in distinguished places where it may be conveniently c had a supply of experts. But when it is of the same e city or diocese, f actor and defendant, the cause should not be committed, lest any of them be convened except by the bishop against someone of his own diocese, or by someone against him or his chapter, or against a university.

b Unless in general it is most true and all the more so that if in the city or diocese of his own, the bishop should procure a judge against any of his subjects, he could be refused as suspect, as above, that letters may not be omitted, "Approaching," below.

c Supply. For advocates, says the proctor. Digest, On the cause, law "From enemies," section final, On violence, and the common, Clementines, "Since by the city," 11th question, "In no way." There is contention between judges and prelates concerning this, because he says "distinguished place" and that a supply of experts is to be had there, the other denies it. What shall be done? One must recur to the common opinion of the people, Digest, On the furniture of a legacy, law "Texo," and as above, On betrothals, "From letters," which even until now is contested. It is recurred to the arbitration of a good man, Digest, On the ten obligations, law "Continuous addition." Not delegated, which favors jurisdiction or [the opposite], and below, On penalties, "Beloved," section "In good," and understand the ecclesiastical judge of that place to be a "good man" according to Innocent. The Ostian, however, says one must recur here to the arbitration of the judge, that is, of a good man, and here it is understood to be a continuous path, for since they are thus chosen, therefore according to him, arbitrators, as above, in this same, "Pastoral," and On the office of the delegate, "Suspicion," which would be notoriously evident if there were a supply of experts there. To this, on appeals, he resolved, below. I believe that if the judge is constituted to an adversary, then the aforementioned suspicion has place, and this if the contention were only for the parts. I believe that the judge can know and judge what I see, because he pronounces whether his jurisdiction is [such], which through the section above, in the same, concerning those. And make for what is accustomed to be recited, On probation, "By the procession." And it makes for below, section "First," in the end. Correcting and moderating the statute.

d Since indeed this begins generally, as above, in the same, "Not some," and it is of highest equity that follows, that they have domicile in the same city.

e Of the same city or diocese. And the same I understand when he has his domicile, which can be, as Digest, To the municipality, "Another assumption," which even now I say will have place, as this and not the following, which is sufficiently proven, as above, On the competent forum, "From the part of B." Nor can it be denied, law "which is also of another city," which is not even of this, since it requires the same. Whence it is said that these have, as above, On the competent forum.

f Actor and defendant in the signification. Forum, etc., in all.

g Outside the city or diocese itself.

h I believe they are omitted. This seems true unless the express consent of the parties has accessed it, argument below, in the same, "In nothing," etc., which also makes against it, when in that case it is expressed, in this it is not. Argument on the decree "To the audience." However, it seems so, since this was introduced only in favor of the parties, On the rules "To the Apostolic," with its concords. And although this seems sufficiently reasonable,

not however do I say this asserting that what is said in the end, [in the] same, concerning "I have divine, however, the curia to observe it and that such commissions emanated from the curia." The said sets the excepted cases.

a city, village, or castle the action was to be directed, or the actor is not daring to enter the same city or diocese, or fearing the n power of his adversary o deservedly, cannot g convene him r securely outside the city and diocese itself. In these expressed cases, the cause can be omitted h nullity, provided they are not further than v one day's journey of the same.

i By the bishop. Or in his city or diocese he could procure a judge against any of his subjects, he could be refused as suspect, as above, that letters may not be omitted, "Approaching," below.

k Of his diocese. If it were of another, then also he would not procure in his own, as below, "First," for of his own he said, because this one who treats only when actor and defendant of the same diocese, whence the word "my" otherwise would not be placed openly.

l By someone. Against whom, namely, if the actor should find a judge in the city of the bishop who does not favor the bishop, argument above, that letters may not be omitted, "Approaching," 50, there and all exist under the stricture of the actor.

m Not daring. Perhaps a Ghibelline, and there the Guelphs rule, or conversely, or perhaps banished.

n Power. The parity of the judge is to be served, law "To the more powerful, we cannot be equals," Digest, On alienations, "Of the judge, the cause makes," law, which also in "First," the word, that if he were to say he doubts where [he is] not.

o Deservedly. One must not doubt; he is not excused, as above, in the same, "When it happens," On simony, and if questions, with the end.

p When accessing the adversary, note that when it is required within in judgments, as of the judges themselves.

q When within the city and diocese itself, to whom both the actor and defendant [belong].

r Securely. Which is required in judgments, so that in the exercise of those judges and places, he is suitable and secure, otherwise the appeal has place.

s Can. He can procure [a judge] against the powerful in his own city or diocese, the omission holds, and the same conversely, always saving the right of recusation, saving his adversary against the cause.

t Against the aforementioned chapter, or universities or powerful [persons] or his adversary who dares not enter the places.

v One day's journey. Formerly we used to say of two, by the decree above, in the same, "Not some." And what do you say if it is acted by real action? Will the calculation be made from the boundaries of the diocese where the thing is situated, according to what was formerly done? And will the calculation of two days' journey be there, according to what it formerly was? Or only one, as here? That it was so formerly is proven, as above, in the same, "Beloved," 2nd, On the competent forum, "From the part of B." It seems that one must stand to this new law today, last concerning this matter, and as it follows generally, it must be accepted generally, below, 1st book, chapter 1, so that only one day's journey calculation is had, and not two. And with the determination that is placed here. But from what place it is calculated is sufficiently doubtful. Suppose, indeed, Bologna against Bologna, concerning the thing in Milan, where must he procure? Shall it be Bologna or Milan, or a place nearby within a day's journey from Milan? Also, suppose that Bologna against Reggio, concerning the thing in Milan, where will he procure? Whether Reggio, or a place nearby within a day's journey, or Milan, or a place nearby within a day's journey? Also see another doubt, that if Bologna procures against Reggio, domiciled and changing origin, will he have the requisition of citing Reggio, or will he mutually with the reason of origin be said to be of the place, so that the bishop of the place may ordain him.