Responsa for Bava Metzia 31:7
נפלה ליה בירושה ירושה ממילא היא ולאו איהו קא טרח אבתרה
It is obvious that if he [who robbed a field and sold it], subsequently sold it [to another person], or bequeathed it to his heirs, or gave it away as a present, [and then bought it from the original owner, we must assume that] he did not, [in buying the field,] intend to secure it thereby for the [first] buyer.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the robber sold the field a second time (to another person), or disposed of it in some other way after selling it to the first person, it is obvious that his subsequent action in buying the field from the original owner was not due to a desire to secure the field for the first buyer, and must have been prompted by a different motive. The first buyer would not then be entitled to keep the field, which would legally belong to the person to whom it was subsequently sold, given or bequeathed. ');"><sup>6</sup></span>
Explore responsa for Bava Metzia 31:7. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.