Responsa for Bava Batra 271:9
בעא מיניה אמר ליה הכי אמר רב הלכה כרבי יוסי בתר דנפקו אמר ליה היינו טעמיה דרבי יוסי דאמר זמנו של שטר מוכיח עליו תניא נמי הכי רבי יוסי אומר אינו צריך מפני שזמנו של שטר מוכיח עליו
or a retraction.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Asserting that the divorce was not to take effect from that day onwards, as the first part of the expression implied, but only after his death; and since one cannot give a divorce after death, the document is invalid. ');"><sup>23</sup></span> Here, however, [it is obvious that] he meant to say this to him.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To the son. ');"><sup>24</sup></span> 'Acquire the land itself<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'the body', i.e., the principal. capital, actual estate. ');"><sup>25</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.