Responsa for Bava Kamma 230:12
התם נמי אפשר דמנח מידי אפומא דחביתא דשפי ליה
But was it not taught<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. J. Ter. VIII, 5. ');"><sup>31</sup></span> in reference to this that R. Simeon said in the name of R. Joshua b. Levi that this ruling applies only if it has not been stirred, but if it had been stirred it would be forbidden?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Here likewise, since he cannot avoid stirring the wine while pouring it from the barrel into the strainer, the venom will pass into the receptacle.] ');"><sup>32</sup></span> — Even there it is possible [to rectify matters by] putting some [cloth] on the mouth of the barrel and straining the liquid gently through. But if we follow R. Nehemiah, is it permitted to make unclean produce <i>terumah</i> even with respect to other unclean produce? Surely it has been taught: It is permitted to make unclean produce <i>terumah</i> with respect to other unclean produce, or clean produce with respect to other clean produce, but not unclean produce with respect to clean produce,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Ter. II, 2, and Yeb. 89a. ');"><sup>33</sup></span>
Teshuvot Maharam
A. Since the books were taken by Gentile robbers, A did not lose hope of retrieving them (B. K. 114a) and thus legally retained title to his books. Therefore, B must return the books to A. B is not entitled to any compensation, since it was common knowledge that A was robbed of his books, and since B bought them from known robbers.
This Responsum is addressed to "my teacher Rabbi Eliakim."
SOURCES: Pr. 1009; Cr. 196–7; Mord. B. K. 163.
Teshuvot Maharam
A. A is under no obligation to return the book to its owners, for as soon as the latter gave up hope of saving the book, it became abandoned property.
SOURCES: Cr. 251; Mord. B. K. 171; Mordecai Hagadol p. 392d; Hag. Maim., Gezelah 12, 6; Agudah B. K. 140.
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.