Yeshiva
Beit Midrash
- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- P'ninat Mishpat
Ruling: Beit din’s first decision was on pl1’s responsibility for her partners’ potential obligations. The Yerushalmi (Shvuot 5:1) posits that two people who borrow together from one lender are arevim (guarantors) for each other, and the Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 77:1) applies this concept to a variety of joint financial endeavors, which includes joint renting. This is especially true here because pl1-4 signed a contract together (see Shach 129:2) and because they benefited from the fact they rented as a group.
There is a machloket Rishonim whether this type of arvut is of a regular arev or an arev kablan. The difference is that the former pays only if the partner lacks the money to pay, whereas an arev kablan can be made to pay even if the other partner is able to pay his part (Shulchan Aruch, CM 129:8,15). The Shulchan Aruch (CM 77:1) rules that they are regular arevim. Although pl1-4 have refused to pay def, def cannot yet demand payment or offset money from pl1 due to the others’ obligations. Therefore, beit din told def that to promote his full case, he must sue all of the rental partners. [He did this and pl1-4 all took part in the rest of the proceedings.]
Pl1-4 all initially claimed that they paid their part of the rental fee in full (beit din’s analysis of the records uncovered two of them, when withholding rent with def’s permission for overpaying municipal tax, had withheld hundreds of NIS too much). However, not all of them had documentation for all of their payments. Beit din demanded of def to list all of the payments he received, which def claimed he was not responsible to do. Even if def were to claim that he certainly was not overpaid, he still has to provide documentation because withholding documentation can be a sign that the information is against him (Rama, CM 75:1). The matter is clearer when a defendant is unsure whether he owes money. Not being sure is legitimate only when he is not able to know, not when he does not bother to find out (see Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 98:3, and Taz ad loc. 6).
We will continue with specific monetary claims next time.
P'ninat Mishpat (835)
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
754 - P'ninat Mishpat: Realtor Fee Despite the Buyer’s Refusal?
755 - P'ninat Mishpat: Overpaying Rent by One of the Roommates – part I
756 - P'ninat Mishpat: Overpaying Rent by One of the Roommates – part II
Load More
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
P'ninat Mishpat Repercussions of a Sale That Turned Out Not Happening – part II
(based on ruling 83045 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts)
Igrot Hare’aya Raffle of Property in Eretz Yisrael for Tzedaka
Igrot Hare’aya – Letters of Rav Kook: – #220
Igrot Hare’aya Connecting Disciplines in Torah Study
Igrot Hare’aya – Letters of Rav Kook #103 – part II
P'ninat Mishpat P'ninat Mishpat: Agricultural Water Rights – part I
based on ruling 84122 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Rabbis in Midrash
Lessons
fast navigation
Various Events FOR WHOM NOT TO VOTE
Rav Zvi Yehuda Kook stressed that Israeli politics is G-dly, so I have no problem answering this common question on a Torani blog. Also, Free-Will is a G-d-given right and obligation, to "destine one's fate" (R. Soloveichik, Kol Dodi Dofek, 67), so I obviously don't tell others how to vote. But once not a few (especially young) have already asked, a couple of personal words from experience and thoughts from chazal & Rav Kook which may be of help to others, mainly for whom NOT to vote.
P'ninat Mishpat Fallout from Failure to Install Elevator – part II
based on ruling 85007 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
