De transactionibus theses LXIV

XLVIII.
Just as a transaction made in good faith cannot be rescinded under the pretext of a document discovered afterward.

XLIX.
And although the one who has agreed may immediately regret it, the transaction nevertheless cannot be rescinded, nor can the lawsuit be revived.

L.
For this reason, it is rightly held that transactions possess no less authority than res judicata matters already judged.

LI.
If, however, when a pact of transaction has been interposed regarding a certain matter, it is understood that nothing more may be sought, the action for other remaining questions will remain intact, even if the phrase "on this account" was not added.

LII.
But we do not think that a general transaction should be restricted to such a degree that it is not also extended to matters connected to the case itself.

LIII.
Even if laws prohibit a transaction from being rescinded when it has been finished by a general agreement under the pretext of items discovered later, an error regarding the ownership of a thing belonging to another, established at the time of the transaction outside the persons of the transacting parties, can cause no harm.

LIIII.
There is no doubt that fear, which would overcome a steadfast man, is sufficient to rescind matters that have been settled by consent, although the quality of the principal case is not sufficient to argue fear.

LV.
Fraud original: "Dolus" does not rescind a transaction, but is purged either by an exception a defense plea or a replication a plaintiff's reply to a plea, when the primary action remains; if that indeed is extinguished, the action based on fraud remains.