Responsa for Bava Batra 82:10
שלשה לקוחות מצטרפין אמר רב וכולם בשטר
what [are we to infer]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Does this constitute proof that he sold it or not? ');"><sup>9</sup></span>
Maharach Or Zarua Responsa
Q - (1) A and B are partners in a courtyard. A wants to build a privy in the courtyard, but B objects to this proposal. A claims that he should be allowed to build a privy on the property, for the same reason that it is permissible for B's womenfolk to wash clothes in the yard, since it is objectionable and inconvenient for the latter to use the public laundry. A asserts it is likewise unpleasant and offensive for him to use the public privy.
(2) A built a structure on top of the stairway. B objects to its presence and demands its removal.
(3) A and B built additions to their buildings. Each demand that the other remove the addition. A claims that he should not be ordered to tear down his addition, as his father's writ of partition, which was duly signed and executed, gave him the right to renovate or add to his house, according to his discretion , provided that the length or width of the original building was not, in any way enlarged.
A - (1) Although it is as offensive and inconvenient for A to utilize a public privy, as it is for B's womenfolk to patronize a public laundry, the two cases are dissimiliar. In the latter instance, the land need not be dug up, and if a particular space was needed, the washing could be done in another part of the courtyard. The former instance, however, requires that the land be dug up, and furthermore, the privy can not be readily moved. B's objection is therefore sustained.
(2) Unless B raised an objection at the commencement of the construction, it is not necessary for A to remove the structure. However, the structure must not block the right of passage to the street.
(3) We accept the veracity of A's claim, concerning the conditions, which he avers, were stated in his father's writ of partition. By the same token, we assume that A tacitly concedes that what applies to himself is applicable to B. Therefore, neither A, nor B, need remove the additions which they built.
(2) A built a structure on top of the stairway. B objects to its presence and demands its removal.
(3) A and B built additions to their buildings. Each demand that the other remove the addition. A claims that he should not be ordered to tear down his addition, as his father's writ of partition, which was duly signed and executed, gave him the right to renovate or add to his house, according to his discretion , provided that the length or width of the original building was not, in any way enlarged.
A - (1) Although it is as offensive and inconvenient for A to utilize a public privy, as it is for B's womenfolk to patronize a public laundry, the two cases are dissimiliar. In the latter instance, the land need not be dug up, and if a particular space was needed, the washing could be done in another part of the courtyard. The former instance, however, requires that the land be dug up, and furthermore, the privy can not be readily moved. B's objection is therefore sustained.
(2) Unless B raised an objection at the commencement of the construction, it is not necessary for A to remove the structure. However, the structure must not block the right of passage to the street.
(3) We accept the veracity of A's claim, concerning the conditions, which he avers, were stated in his father's writ of partition. By the same token, we assume that A tacitly concedes that what applies to himself is applicable to B. Therefore, neither A, nor B, need remove the additions which they built.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Teshuvot Maharam
Q. A, wishing to appeal to a higher court, demands that the local court give him a written statement as to the reasons underlying the court's decision in his case versus B. Can B be enjoined from issuing execution on the rendered judgment until such time as the appeal has been disposed of?
A. No, B may collect his money immediately.
SOURCES: Cr. 280; Pr. 523; L. 128; Hag. Maim. to Sanhedrin, 6, 8.
A. No, B may collect his money immediately.
SOURCES: Cr. 280; Pr. 523; L. 128; Hag. Maim. to Sanhedrin, 6, 8.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy