Responsa for Bava Batra 271:14
אמר רב כהנא אמריתה לשמעתא קמיה דרב זביד מנהרדעא ואמר לי אתון הכי מתניתו לה אנן הכי מתנינן לה אמר רבא אמר רב נחמן בהקנאה אינו צריך בין אקנייה וקנינא מיניה בין קנינא מיניה ואקנייה לא צריך בדוכרן פתגמי דהוו באנפנא פליגי:
acquired it from him',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From the testator, by symbolic acquisition. ');"><sup>36</sup></span> there is no need [for this].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the insertion of 'from this day'. Since two distinct kinds of transfer of possession have been mentioned, [1] he conferred possession and [2] we acquired etc., the claim of the donee is thereby strengthened and he acquires ownership of the gift even though, 'from this day' has not been recorded. ');"><sup>37</sup></span> [If, however, it reads], 'We acquired it from him' [concluding with], 'he gave him possession', this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The addition of 'from this day'. ');"><sup>38</sup></span>
Teshuvot Maharam
A. According to B's statement, A never gained title to the money since it was not given to him as a gift causa mortis, and he did not perform the formal act of possession necessary in order to gain title to an ordinary gift. His brothers, therefore inherited their share of the money. However, if A claims that he was present when his mother deposited the money with B, and that this money was thus deposited specifically for his benefit, as a gift causa mortis, B must swear that the facts are as he claims them to be.
This Responsum is addressed to R. Menahem ha-Levi.
SOURCES: Cr. 38; Pr. 420–421; Mord. B. B. 592; Mordecai Hagadol, p. 321c.
Teshuvot Maharam
A. Since B has been prevented, by death, from fulfilling his promise, he never became obligated to pay the 20*In some sources (Pr. 50, L. 355) the reading is “marks.” The discrepancy arose because of the similarity of the two Hebrew letters of Khaf and Beth, which stand for 20 and 2 respectively. The Cremona source and the Mord., however, used the word Esrim, 20, specifically. marks to A. Consequently his heirs owe nothing to A.
This question was also sent to R. Meir by his father, R. Baruch, who was one of the judges in this case.
SOURCES: Cr. 31; Pr. 50; Pr. 939; L. 355; Mord. B.M. 247; cf. Jacob Weil, Responsa 105; ibid. 142.