Responsa for Bava Batra 11:14

אמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה המשכיר בית לחבירו

or fittings for fixing planks.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cavities made of lathes alongside of the wall in which upright beams may afterwards be placed. In both these cases he shows his intention of building higher, and therefore must contribute to the cost of the whole. ');">¹²</span> R. Huna said: [If in the part of the wall above four cubits] there are cavities,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which would be suitable for resting cross beams in, if another wall is built opposite. ');">¹³</span> this does not create a presumption that [the one who built it was assisted by the other], even if he made the wooden lining in the cavities; for he can plead [when claiming part payment for it from the other]: The reason why I put them In was to prevent my wall becoming damaged, should you persuade me [to let you put cross beams in].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If Reuben raises the party wall higher than four cubits, at the same time putting cavities in it, and Simeon subsequently builds a wall parallel to it, Simeon cannot point to the cavities as proof that he has paid his share for the party wall, because Reuben can say that he put them in of his own accord as a precaution. ');">¹⁴</span> R. Nahman said: If a man has acquired a prescriptive right<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That is to say, if the other has allowed him to do so without protesting, and he can also plead (but without adducing proof) that he acquired the right by gift or purchase. ');">¹⁵</span> to rest small beams [upon his neighbour's wall], that does not give him the right to [rest] large beams upon it, but if he has acquired the right to [rest] large beams, that does give him the right to [rest] small beams. R. Joseph, however, said that if he has acquired the right to [rest] small beams, he also has the right to [rest] large beams. According to another version, R. Nahman said that if he has acquired the right for small beams he has the right for large beams, and if he has acquired the right for large beams he has the right for small beams. R. Nahman said: If a man has a prescriptive right<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. preceding note. ');">¹⁶</span> to let water drip [from his roof into his neighbour's courtyard], he also has the right to [carry it off there by means of] a gutter-pipe;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because if the water flows down in this way it is more useful to the owner of the courtyard. ');">¹⁷</span> but if he has acquired the prescriptive right to [carry it off by means of] a gutter-pipe, he has not also the right to let it drip [from the roof]. R. Joseph, however, said that if he has acquired the right to [carry it off by means of] a gutter-pipe, he has also the right to let it drip [from the roof]. According to another version, R. Nahman said that if he has acquired the prescriptive right to carry it off by a gutter-pipe, he has the right to let it drip [from the roof], but he has not the right to [let it drip from] a cone-shaped roof of reeds;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From which the water would drip so continuously as to become a nuisance. ');">¹⁸</span> whereas R. Joseph says that he has that right also. In a case which came before him, R. Joseph decided according to his own view. R. Nahman said in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha: If a man lets an apartment to another

Teshuvot Maharam

Teshuvot Maharam