Responsa for Bava Batra 88:2
אלא אפילו עשאו אפותיקי נמי לא מאי טעמא כדרבא דאמר רבא עשה עבדו אפותיקי ומכרו בעל חוב גובה ממנו שורו וחמורו אפותיקי ומכרו אין בעל חוב גובה הימנו
(the reason being that they are movables, and movables cannot be mortgaged to a creditor; and even if the debtor gives a written promise to pay 'from the coat on his back', that is only binding so long as they are actually there but not if they are not there), but even if he did declare them to be security, the creditor still has no lien on them.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And therefore the seller can still testify on the purchaser's behalf. ');"><sup>2</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