Responsa for Bava Kamma 204:20
אלא אמר אביי ה"ק הלוקח שדה בשם חבירו (ריש גלותא)
Shall we say that this differs from the view of the scholars of the West<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 594. ');"><sup>33</sup></span> who stated: Who indeed informed the vendor of the wheat so that he may transfer the ownership of the wheat to the owner of the money? — As far as that goes there would be no difficulty, as this could hold good where e.g., the vendee made this known to the owner of the field and also informed the witnesses [who signed the deed] about it. Read, however, the concluding clause: '[But if when buying it he explicitly made] this stipulation<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To the vendor. ');"><sup>30</sup></span> he cold compel the Exilarch to sell it.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., to draw up a new deed in the name of the actual purchaser. ');"><sup>29</sup></span> But why should it be so? Why should the Exilarch not be entitled to say: 'I want neither your compliments<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In drawing up the deed in my name. ');"><sup>34</sup></span> nor your insults.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In making me appear as a dealer in land. ');"><sup>35</sup></span> Abaye therefore said: what was meant was this: If one buys a field in the name of another
Teshuvot Maharam
A. A must pay B the money coming to B from the Gentile for the following reasons: a) We assume that A became a trustee for B's part of the loan and, therefore, must collect it for B, for how else did B expect to get his money back?; b) A caused a definite loss of money to B and must compensate him for such loss; c) the Gentile became obligated to pay money to B, even though he did not know that part of the money loaned to him belonged to B. Therefore, when the Gentile paid off his debt to A, he gave to A the money he owed to B, and A must give that money to B.
SOURCES: Pr. 254.
Teshuvot Maharam
A. A dowry gift becomes the property of the donee only if the marriage takes place. Therefore, neither A nor his daughter has ever gained title to B's money, and A must return the principal plus the interest to B. Even if B expressly stipulated that he will forfeit the 15 pounds if the marriage does not take place, such a stipulation is considered an Asmakhta and is not valid. B, however, must pay A for his trouble in managing B's investments.
SOURCES: Cr. 86; Pr. 285; Mord. B.B. 615; Agudah B.B. 198.