Responsa for Bava Metzia 138:10

Q. A young man lent money to A stipulating that the latter be responsible for the loss of it through theft, but not through unavoidable accident. The former also tutored A's son. In return for both services A paid the young man's living expenses. Is the lending of the aforesaid money considered a legitimate transaction?
A. If while the arrangement was made with the young man to rehearse the lessons with A's son in return for receiving his sustenance, the stipulation was made that the young man lend money to A, the transaction is considered usurious, even though A would have been content to pay the young man's living expenses in return for his tutoring alone. The fact that the money was not given as an actual loan, since A was not to be responsible for its loss through unavoidable accident, does not materially change the situation, since the Talmud considers the renting of money a usurious transaction (B. M. 69b). But, if it is true, what you write at the end of your letter, that the young man gave A his money as an outright gift so that he is at liberty, should he so desire, never to return the money to the young man, the transaction is a legitimate one.
SOURCES: Cr. 257; Am II, 151; Mord. B.M. 316; Tesh. Maim. to Mishpatim, 45; Agudah B.M. 88. Cf. Maharil, Responsa 37; Moses Minz, Responsa 72; Terumat Hadeshen 302.

Q. Must a court decree be dated, since, otherwise, a creditor who obtains a later decree would be able to enforce his rights thereunder, prior to the creditor who received the former decree.
A. It is advisable to include the date in a court decree, but not for the reason cited. A creditor, whose bond is dated before the bond of his fellow creditor, should receive a prior lien if execution is to be issued upon real property; but if execution is to be issued upon personal property, the creditor who seizes the property first has a prior lien without regard to the date of his bond. In any case, the date of the court decree is immaterial. Moreover, no undated document is invalid except a divorce.
SOURCES: Cr. 281; Pr. 525.

Q. How long after a decision of a court has been rendered, is a party to the suit entitled to a statement as to the reasons underlying such decision? Within what period, after a decision has been rendered, can a person appeal to a higher court? Must one declare before the local court that he will seek an appeal?
A. If a party to a suit originally wanted to bring his case to a higher court but was forced to try it at the local court, he is entitled to a written statement of the reasons for the decision, and he may appeal his case at any time. But if both parties agreed to have their case tried by the local court, the court is under no obligation to give any written opinion.
SOURCES: Cr. 281; Pr. 524; Mord. Sanh. 708; Hag. Maim. Sanhedrin, 6, 7.

Q. A promised ten marks to charity. He gave the money to B for investment purposes on condition that B pay to the poor of a certain community ten quarter-marks per year.
A. B should not give the ten quarter-marks to the poor of that community, since it would constitute unlawful usury. If, however, B earned profit with the ten marks, he must give part of the profit to the poor of another city, since one is not permitted to profit from charity money.
SOURCES: Pr. 999.