Responsa for Bava Kamma 229:14
וסבר רב לא עשו בו תקנת השוק והא רב הונא תלמידיה דרב הוה וחנן בישא גנב גלימא וזבנה אתא לקמיה דרב הונא א"ל לההוא גברא זיל שרי עביטך
maintained that there is no distinction.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As in both these cases the ownership is transferred to the purchaser who may thus retain the articles, while the original owner could have a claim only against the thief. ');"><sup>25</sup></span> R. Papa said: Regarding the garment itself<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which has been misappropriated. ');"><sup>26</sup></span>
Teshuvot Maharam
Q. A's house was robbed and he reported this in town. Subsequently, he recognized one of his books in B's possession B had bought the book from C who had bought it from a Gentile. Moreover, A does not usually sell his books. B, therefore, stated under oath the price he paid for the book; but A constantly deferred payment of that amount.
A. A owes that amount to B. Since the court has a right to distrain a debtor's article for the benefit of the creditor, the court may surely confirm B in the possession of the book after the latter pays to A the difference between its actual value and the price he had originally paid. If B paid C for the book more than the latter paid to the Gentile, C must return the difference to A.
SOURCES: Am II. 138.
A. A owes that amount to B. Since the court has a right to distrain a debtor's article for the benefit of the creditor, the court may surely confirm B in the possession of the book after the latter pays to A the difference between its actual value and the price he had originally paid. If B paid C for the book more than the latter paid to the Gentile, C must return the difference to A.
SOURCES: Am II. 138.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy