[Casus longi super V libros decretalium]

...sue the abbot along with the monastery, and not the monks. And note that the prelate is held to fulfill his office and procure the affairs of his congregation. ¶ Also, note that unless the affairs of the abbacy and the convent are distinct, the abbot cannot be sued without the convent.

Case: While the monastery of Lehon was vacant

When the beloved—there, two elections were celebrated. One was for the custodian of that monastery, and the other was for G., a nun of the same monastery. Regarding these elections, the cause was committed first to the Scholastic of Hildesheim and his co-judges, under this form: that they should personally go to the monastery, that they should remove the administrator of the abbey, and that restitution of certain things subtracted by either party should be made. ¶ These judges proceeded against the form of the mandate. Afterwards, the cause was committed to the Abbot of Remothen and his co-judges through surreptition, because in the letters, besides the knowledge of the Lord Pope, an article was inserted regarding the resignation of the things subtracted which was contained in the previous letters. And these judges began to proceed in the cause. Finally, the business was brought before the Pope himself. The Pope, knowing of the processes of the aforementioned judges, when he found the letters of the second judges obtained through surreptition—because the article regarding the resignation of the things subtracted had been inserted against the knowledge of the Lord Pope in the second letters, which had been placed in the previous ones, but of which no mention was made in the second letters—and therefore the Pope quashed whatever was done on the occasion of the second letters. Furthermore, the first judges proceeded against the form of the mandate. For when they ought to have gone to the place, and left the administration of the abbey to a suitable person, to whom the resignation of the things subtracted would be made, they, having omitted this chapter, adjudicated on other matters inordinately. On account of which, the Lord Pope declared their process null and

void, because they proceeded against the form of the mandate and the order of law. Therefore, the Lord Pope mandates to the third judges that these first judges should restore certain nuns who were despoiled, and afterwards, the form of the mandate having been diligently observed, they should proceed in that business reasonably. ¶ Note that letters obtained through surreptition are not valid, and upon an exception being opposed, whatever was done by them is quashed. ¶ Also, second letters are not valid unless they make mention of the first. ¶ Also, that which is mandated to be done first must be expedited first according to the form of the mandate. ¶ Also, the form of the mandate must be observed most diligently. ¶ Also, a process against the form of the mandate is frivolous.

Case: Some were obtaining letters against

Often their adversaries, but they were not using them. Afterwards, their adversaries obtained other letters regarding the same cause to other judges. And then the first petitioners exhibited their letters, when they were met by the second ones, saying that the second letters were not valid as they made no mention of the first. It was asked what the law is. The Pope says that the malice of men is not to be indulged. We decree that if anyone has obtained letters and has not used them through malice or negligence within a year after he had the opportunity of judges, he can be sued by the authority of the second ones, even if he made no mention of the first. ¶ Note that the malice of men is not to be indulged. ¶ Also, malice or negligence is proved by the lapse of time. ¶ Also, time does not run against him who cannot have the opportunity of a judge.

Case: Someone obtained

When it happens that one obtains letters to judges against his adversaries, the other party obtains the cause