Responsa for Ketubot 152:9
אלא כי אתא רמי בר יחזקאל אמר לא תצייתינהו להני כללי דכייל יהודה אחי משמיה דשמואל הכי אמר שמואל כל שנולד ספק ברשותו עליו הראיה ותנא תונא כלה
Rather, when Rami b. Yehezkel came he said, “Pay no regard to those rules which my brother Judah laid down in the name of Shmuel; for thus said Shmuel: He in whose domain the doubt first arose must produce the proof; and the Tanna [of our Mishnah who taught about] the bride provides support for this ruling.
Teshuvot Maharam
Q B discovered that the horse he bought from A is injured. He claims that the horse must have been injured while in A's possession, that the purchase was a mistake and demands, therefore, that the contract be rescinded. A, on the other hand, claims that the horse was in perfect condition when he delivered it to B.
A. Even if B had not, as yet, paid for the horse, the burden is upon him to prove that the horse was injured while in A's possession. If he cannot produce such proof, A is to swear that when he sold the horse to B he did not know that the horse was injured. If he takes such an oath he is entitled to collect his money from B.
SOURCES: Pr. 575; L. 122; Mord. Ket. 200; Tesh. Maim. to Kinyan, 7; Mordecai Hagadol, p. 165d; cf. Sinai vol. VI (1942) p. 221.
A. Even if B had not, as yet, paid for the horse, the burden is upon him to prove that the horse was injured while in A's possession. If he cannot produce such proof, A is to swear that when he sold the horse to B he did not know that the horse was injured. If he takes such an oath he is entitled to collect his money from B.
SOURCES: Pr. 575; L. 122; Mord. Ket. 200; Tesh. Maim. to Kinyan, 7; Mordecai Hagadol, p. 165d; cf. Sinai vol. VI (1942) p. 221.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Teshuvot Maharam
Q B discovered that the horse he bought from A is injured. He claims that the horse must have been injured while in A's possession, that the purchase was a mistake and demands, therefore, that the contract be rescinded. A, on the other hand, claims that the horse was in perfect condition when he delivered it to B.
A. Even if B had not, as yet, paid for the horse, the burden is upon him to prove that the horse was injured while in A's possession. If he cannot produce such proof, A is to swear that when he sold the horse to B he did not know that the horse was injured. If he takes such an oath he is entitled to collect his money from B.
SOURCES: Pr. 575; L. 122; Mord. Ket. 200; Tesh. Maim. to Kinyan, 7; Mordecai Hagadol, p. 165d; cf. Sinai vol. VI (1942) p. 221.
A. Even if B had not, as yet, paid for the horse, the burden is upon him to prove that the horse was injured while in A's possession. If he cannot produce such proof, A is to swear that when he sold the horse to B he did not know that the horse was injured. If he takes such an oath he is entitled to collect his money from B.
SOURCES: Pr. 575; L. 122; Mord. Ket. 200; Tesh. Maim. to Kinyan, 7; Mordecai Hagadol, p. 165d; cf. Sinai vol. VI (1942) p. 221.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy