In addressing the question of which devices may be used to remove one’s beard without violating the Torah prohibition, halachic literature focuses on the extent to which these devices function like a razor blade.
A Threat To Life And Limb ‘How Many Lashes Are Given Him?’ (Makkos 22a-b)
The reason the defendant is entitled to refuse to repay the loan or to return the deposit to only one of its owners is that he accepted the money or the deposit from both.
In the case of eidei hachashah, however, the second pair of witnesses testifies that the crime never occurred.
When Shraga was ready to go back, Ari looked in the closet, but the shirt was missing.
The underlying loan survives as the obligation of the borrower even after the release of the first guarantor.
There are, however, times when the concern of Chillul Hashem is so paramount that one must choose to die rather than violate any prohibition in public.
Entitlements ‘Not Returned To His Former Prominence’ (Makkos 12a)
But I bought the gem from you and gave you the money, reasoned Mr. Silver. You owe me the money; you go deal with the seller!
The lender who sued must hold half of what he collected on trust for the other lender.
The authority to incarcerate a person and deny freedom in certain situations is part of halacha le Moshe Mi’Sinai, the Oral Law conveyed by God to Moshe and by Moshe to the people of Israel.
But I borrowed the phone, so your liability is to me, responded Avi. Who cares what went on between me and Yitzi?
The Red Sea’s Argument ‘Relatives Of A Guarantor’ (Makos 7a)
The borrower who paid the entire loan would, of course, have a claim for reimbursement against the co-borrower for the amount he repaid on his behalf.
Without Warning ‘But You Were With Us…’ (Makkos 2a)
"I didn't knowingly damage," pointed out Mrs. Neuman. "I didn't intend to upset the table."
A judge must open the proceedings by urging the litigants to settle the dispute by way of compromise.
Is Silence Golden ? ‘Iyov, Who Was Silent …’ (Sanhedrin 106a)
For example, someone who sold seeds that turned out defective does not have to pay the customer for the incurred labor costs in planting them. When the damage was unintentional, as here, there isn't even a moral obligation.
The forgoing also applies to a plaintiff who sued two borrowers based upon a promissory note for the aggregate amount of the loan advanced to both of them and signed by them jointly.
In dinei nefashot – capital cases – the beit din will accept post verdict evidence to acquit but not to convict.
Must I give the produce itself or can I just give equivalent money to tzedakah instead?
As We Come Closer And Closer ‘… Like The Face Of A Dog’ (Sanhedrin 97a)
It is true that having been sued by Shimon, Levi had no choice but to pay off the whole loan.
If both sets of witnesses have withstood the rigor of the court’s cross examination, why, one might ask, does the beit din believe the evidence of the second set of witnesses more than the first?