Quoting%20commentary for Bava Kamma 51:3

ולא תהא שן ורגל חייבת ברשות הניזק אלא חצי נזק מק"ו מקרן ומה קרן שברה"ר חייבת ברשות הניזק אינה משלמת אלא חצי נזק שן ורגל שברשות הרבים פטורה אינו דין שברשות הניזק משלם חצי נזק

But should we not let Tooth and Foot doing damage on the plaintiff's premises involve the liability for half damages only because of the following <i>a fortiori</i>: If in the case of Horn, where there is liability for damage done even on public ground, there is yet no more than half payment for damage done on the plaintiff's premises,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In accordance with the Rabbis who differ from R. Tarfon; v. supra p. 125. ');">⁵</span> does it not follow that, in the case of Tooth and Foot where there is exemption for damage done on public ground,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra p. 132. ');">⁶</span>

Explore quoting%20commentary for Bava Kamma 51:3. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.