Responsa for Bava Kamma 92:11
ואי פרה וולד דחד נינהו ה"נ דמצי א"ל לבעל פרה ממה נפשך חצי נזק הב לי אלא לא צריכא דפרה דחד וולד דחד
[implying]: let him cause his matters to be brought [first] before them. The Nehardeans however, said; It may sometimes be necessary to give prior consideration to the defendant, as for instance in a case where his property would otherwise depreciate in value.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where, e.g., he has an opportunity of disposing of the estate concerned at a high price — an opportunity he might miss through any delay in a settlement of his counter-claim. ');"><sup>8</sup></span>
Maharach Or Zarua Responsa
R. Asher disagrees with R. Hayyim Eliezer, and maintains that the rule of Asmakta is not applicable in this case. B is considered the agent of A, since the latter voiced no protest when B bound himself, in the presence of A to reconcile C for damages, in the event of a breach of promise. Under these arrangements, the sale was then completed, and the fulfillment of the terms rested with A.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy