Responsa על בבא קמא 123:5
Teshuvot Maharam
Q. A deposited with B for safe-keeping a strongbox well locked up. Subsequently, B broke open the box and left it open. When A came for his box and found it open, he charged that several silver vessels and other valuables were missing. B admitted having opened the box, but said that he abstracted therefrom a single silver vessel because he had gone surety for A and needed the money in order to extricate himself therewith from the entanglements of that obligation.
A. A is to be held responsible for all articles that, according to B's assertion under oath, are missing from the strongbox, provided such articles are usually kept in a strongbox of this type, for the ordinance for the benefit of the robbed person [that the latter take an oath as to the extent of the damage he has suffered, and collect full compensation therefor], applies also to other, similar, damagees. (B.K. 62a).
SOURCES: Cr. 201; Mordecai Hagadol, p. 268b; Sinai VII (1943), 5–6, 49.
A. A is to be held responsible for all articles that, according to B's assertion under oath, are missing from the strongbox, provided such articles are usually kept in a strongbox of this type, for the ordinance for the benefit of the robbed person [that the latter take an oath as to the extent of the damage he has suffered, and collect full compensation therefor], applies also to other, similar, damagees. (B.K. 62a).
SOURCES: Cr. 201; Mordecai Hagadol, p. 268b; Sinai VII (1943), 5–6, 49.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy