Responsa for Ketubot 173:8
שלח ר' זכאי למר עוקבא בין דלא שבועה בין דנקי שבועה בין דלא נדר ובין דנקי נדר בנכסי הוא אינו יכול להשביעה אבל יורשין משביעין אותה מנכסיא אילין בין הוא ובין יורשיו אין משביעין אותה
Zakkai sent to Mar Ukba: Whether [the husband wrote,] “Neither oath” or “Free from oath,” or whether [he wrote,] “Neither vow,” or “Free from vow,” [and he used the expression] “In respect of my property,” he cannot impose an oath upon her, but his heirs may. [If he wrote, however,] “In respect of this property,” neither he nor his heirs may impose an oath on her.
Teshuvot Maharam
Q. B constructed a stone duct near A's wooden house. A objected and B made a written promise to compensate him for any damage the duct might cause to his house. A now demands that B remove his duct because it occasionally permits water and sewage to flow into his house, and he objects to being forced to sue for damages every time it occurs. B claims that water flows into A's house only when the duct breaks. He promises to keep the duct in good condition, but refuses to remove it.
A. B must remove his duct from A's wall for a distance of 3 tefahim (hand-breadths). If the water should, nevertheless, continue to flow into A's house, it is for A to protect his wall by whatever means he sees fit, but he can demand nothing of B.
SOURCES: Cr. 3, 4; Pr. 92; L. 357; Mord. B. B. 520.
A. B must remove his duct from A's wall for a distance of 3 tefahim (hand-breadths). If the water should, nevertheless, continue to flow into A's house, it is for A to protect his wall by whatever means he sees fit, but he can demand nothing of B.
SOURCES: Cr. 3, 4; Pr. 92; L. 357; Mord. B. B. 520.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy