Reference for Bava Kamma 196:9
א"ל רבה לא דכולי עלמא אמרינן באיסורי הנאה הרי שלך לפניך דאם כן נפלגו בחמץ בפסח אלא אמר רבה הכא בגומרין דינו של שור שלא בפניו קא מיפלגי
Rabbah therefore said: Here [in the case before us] the point at issue must be whether [or not] sentence may be pronounced over an ox in its absence. The Rabbis hold that sentence cannot be pronounced over an ox in its absence so that the owner may plead against the bailee thus: 'if you had returned it to me [before the passing of the sentence], I would have driven it away to the pastures,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And no sentence would have been passed on it. ');"><sup>15</sup></span> whereas now you have surrendered my ox into the hands of those against whom I am unable to bring any action.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [I.e., the court. This plea would, however, not apply to leaven where the incidence of the prohibition is not due to an act of the robber but to the intervention of the Passover (Rashi).] ');"><sup>16</sup></span>