Responsa for Bava Batra 88:3
מאי טעמא האי אית ליה קלא והא לית ליה קלא
The reason is to be found in the dictum of Raba, for Raba said: If a man declares his slave security for a debt, and then sells him, the creditor can seize him [in satisfaction of the debt], but if he declares his ox or his ass security for the debt and then sells it, the creditor cannot seize it [in payment of the debt],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Therefore the seller, since he knows that his own creditor cannot seize the ox or ass in question, has no special interest in their retention by the man to whom he sold them, and therefore he may testify on his behalf if his title to them is challenged by a third party. ');"><sup>3</sup></span>
Teshuvot Maharam
Q. A gave a writ of bestowal of movable property to B, in which the clause "the movable property is thus transferred to B together with, and by dint of, real property", was missing. Is the gift binding?
A. I have examined the writ of bestowal and could find nothing wrong with it, for title to movable property can also be transferred by halifin (symbol of exchange).
SOURCES: Cr. 256; Pr. 344.
A. I have examined the writ of bestowal and could find nothing wrong with it, for title to movable property can also be transferred by halifin (symbol of exchange).
SOURCES: Cr. 256; Pr. 344.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Teshuvot Maharam
Q. A gave a writ of bestowal of movable property to B, in which the clause "the movable property is thus transferred to B together with, and by dint of, real property", was missing. Is the gift binding?
A. I have examined the writ of bestowal and could find nothing wrong with it, for title to movable property can also be transferred by halifin (symbol of exchange).
SOURCES: Cr. 256; Pr. 344.
A. I have examined the writ of bestowal and could find nothing wrong with it, for title to movable property can also be transferred by halifin (symbol of exchange).
SOURCES: Cr. 256; Pr. 344.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy