At the beginning of Causa 11, Gratian depicts the “case” which generates the questions that he intends to treat. Two clerics are litigating about estates (de prediis). The plaintiff wants to take the case to a civil court, while the defendant wishes the case heard by an ecclesiastical judge. The former manages to dispossess the latter and to take possession of the disputed property with the help of a civil judge. The bishop discovers this and suspends him from office. When the cleric in contempt continues to administer his office, the bishop deposes him without hope of restitution. Gratian now asks three questions: (1) Should a cleric be brought before a civil judge? (2) If he should not, is the crime of forcing him to appear before a civil judge punishable by suspension? (3) If it is not, should he who held his bishop's sentence in contempt be deposed without hope of restitution?

In this chapter, I shall examine the third question and how Gratian answers it. In the second recension, the questio contains 108 canons (plus two paleae), 56 of which are (wholly or, in three cases, in part) present already in the first recension. Gratian's discussion appears confusing and meandering in the second recension of C. 11, q. 3.