Reference for Bava Kamma 190:15
אמר ליה רבינא לרב אשי מי אמר שמואל בעל חוב ללוקח יהיב ליה שבח והאמר שמואל בעל חוב גובה את השבח א"ל לא קשיא כאן בשבח המגיע לכתפים וכאן בשבח שאין מגיע לכתפים
it would be in accordance neither with R. Judah nor with R. Simeon? — R. Papa might say to you that the ruling [stated in the text] would apply even where the cow has not yet given birth, as even then he would have to pay in accordance with [the value at] the time of the robbery. For as for the mention of 'giving birth', the reason is that since the earlier clause contains the words 'giving birth', the later clause similarly mentions 'giving birth'. It was taught in accordance with R. papa: 'R. Simeon says that [the animal] is to be considered as if its pecuniary value had been insured with the robber, [who will however be paid] to the extent of a half, a third or a fourth [of the increase In value].'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 555. n. 4. ');"><sup>11</sup></span>