web analytics
April 26, 2015 / 7 Iyar, 5775
At a Glance
Judaism
Sponsored Post


Public Passage


Business-Halacha-logo

Pleasantville was a quiet suburban town with large properties and curving roads that wound around them. Mr. Feder lived just behind the local shul. Since the road wound around his property, people coming to shul on Shabbos would often take a shortcut through his property to walk to shul. The treaded area of earth marked the place where people made their way weekly. The through traffic did not bother Mr. Feder, as his house was on the other end of the property. He never made a fuss about it, but had never officially sanctioned this public shortcut.

One day Mr. Feder decided to build a picket fence around his property. The plan was designed with an entrance on the side of his property adjacent to the shul, so that he could go directly there. It enclosed the remainder of the property, though, including the place where people would cut through from the street.

As the posts were being put in place, the president of the shul asked Mr. Feder: “Would you consider leaving an entrance near the street where the shortcut to the shul is?”

“No, I’d like to complete the fence,” replied Mr. Feder. “Once I’m investing in the fence I’d like to do it properly, and that side faces the street.”

“But people have been accustomed for years to cut through your property,” said the president. “For some people, circling around your property means an extra seven minutes walking along the road.”

“It’s my land; I can do what I want,” responded Mr. Feder. “I’ve been nice about it until now, but that doesn’t mean I owe the public anything.”

The following day, the shul president called Mr. Feder. “I did a little research and discovered something interesting,” he said. “The Gemara (B.B. 100a) teaches that a person may not ruin a pathway that the public possessed. This is phrased: ‘Meitzar shehecheziku bo rabim – asur l’kalkelo.’ Since you’ve allowed the public to posses the pathway for the past few years, you’re not allowed to ruin it now.”

“Who says that rule applies here?” asked Mr. Feder. “Maybe it’s only when the public officially possessed the path? I never gave people formal rights to walk through the property. At most a handful of people actually asked me whether it was OK. The rest simply walked! If anything, they were trespassing all these years, and it’s my legal right to put an end to it.”

“But you saw them do it and never protested in any way, so you acquiesced,” argued the president. “If you don’t agree to leave an entrance for the path, I’d like to bring the case before Rabbi Dayan.”

The president had Mr. Feder summoned to Rabbi Dayan’s bet din, with a claim that he be restrained from fencing the public passageway.

After a brief deliberation, Rabbi Dayan issued the ruling: “The members of the shul cannot restrain Mr. Feder from completing his fence.”

“Why is that?” asked the president.

“The law of meitzar shehecheziku bo rabim is explicit in the Gemara and codified in the Shulchan Aruch [C.M. 377:1; 417:2],” explained Rabbi Dayan, “but there are numerous limitations on the practical application of this halacha.”

“First, there is a dispute between the Rishonim on whether tacit acquiescence through silence suffices or explicit permission of the owner is required.

“Second, there is a dispute about whether it suffices that the public simply walked through or if there is need for some construction to enhance the passage.

“Third, the public through traffic must be such that the owner would normally protest the intrusion. However, if the area is not developed anyway or if the public traffic does not interfere with the owner, so that he had no reason to protest their usage of his property, their chazakah of walking is not valid if they did not do construction.

“Fourth, the fact that a group of people used the land as a shortcut does not determine them as public, unless they form a large percentage of the people for whom this passageway was relevant [Chochmas Shlomo 377:1].

“Fifth, some authorities maintain that if the owner has rights officially registered in the land authority, we do not presume mechila on his part by walking alone, if the public did not do any physical improvement to the land [Pischei Teshuvah 153:3; Maharsham I:5. III:376].

“Therefore, on account of five reasons mentioned,” concluded Rabbi Dayan, “Mr. Feder can fence his property even though it will block the passageway to the shul. He never explicitly granted this right; the public never did any physical improvement; he had no real reason to protest previously; the shortcut was used only by a select group; and his property rights are listed with the land authority.” (See Pischei Choshen, Nezikin 8:32 [79-84])

About the Author: Rabbi Meir Orlian is a faculty member of the Business Halacha Institute, headed by HaRav Chaim Kohn, a noted dayan. To receive BHI’s free newsletter, Business Weekly, send an e-mail to subscribe@businesshalacha.com. For questions regarding business halacha issues, or to bring a BHI lecturer to your business or shul, call the confidential hotline at 877-845-8455 or e-mail ask@businesshalacha.com.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “Public Passage”

Comments are closed.

Current Top Story
Car - A-Tor
Updated: Three Injured in Jerusalem Terror Attack, Ambulances and Mayor’s Car also Attacked
Latest Judaism Stories
Torat-Hakehillah-logo-NEW

In her diary, Anne Frank wrote words that provided hope for a humanity faced with suffering.

Leff-042415

The Arizal taught this same approach, making the point that the Torah would never mention wicked people and their sins if there was not great depth involved from which we are to learn from.

Staum-042415

Humility is not achieved when all is well and life is peachy but rather when times are trying and challenging.

In order to be free of the negative consequences of violating a shvu’ah or a neder, the shvu’ah or neder themselves must be annulled.

“I accept the ruling,” said Mr. Broyer, “but would like to understand the reasoning.”

He feared the people would have a change of heart and support Rechavam.

Ramifications Of A Printers Error
‘The Note Holder’s Burden of Proof’
(Kesubos 83b)

Question: If Abraham was commanded to circumcise his descendants on the eighth day, why do Arabs – who claim to descend from Abraham through Yishmael – wait until their children are 13 to circumcise them? I am aware that this is a matter of little consequence to our people. Nevertheless, this inconsistency is one that piques my curiosity.

M. Goldman
(Via E-mail)

In this case one could reason that by applying halach achar harov we could permit the forbidden bird as well.

“What a way to spend a Sunday afternoon,” my husband remarked. “Well, baruch Hashem we are safe, there was no accident, and I’m sure there is a good reason for everything that happened to us,” I mused.

The answer to this question is based on one of the greatest shortcomings of man – self-limiting beliefs.

Myth that niddah=dirty stopped many women from accepting laws of family purity and must be shattered

In every generation is the challenge to purge the culture of our exile from our minds and our hearts

Rabbi Fohrman connects the metzora purification process with the korban pesach.

The day after Israel was declared a State, everyone recited Hallel and people danced in the streets.

More Articles from Rabbi Meir Orlian
Business-Halacha-logo

“I accept the ruling,” said Mr. Broyer, “but would like to understand the reasoning.”

Business-Halacha-logo

“The problem is that the sum total is listed is $17,000. However, when you add the sums mentioned, it is clear that the total of $17,000 is an error. Thus, Mr. Broyer owes me $18,000, not $17,000.”

“The guiding principle regarding work terms is: hakol keminhag hamidina – everything in accordance with the common practice,” replied Rabbi Dayan.

“No, I can’t take more than $65,” protested Mrs. Fleisher. “You may not owe me more than that.”

“If I notify people, nobody will buy the matzos!” exclaimed Mr. Mandel. “Once the halachic advisory panel ruled leniently, why can’t I sell the matzos regularly?”

“Do we have to donate again?” some people asked. “Is it fair that we should have to pay twice?”

“This sounds like a question for Rabbi Dayan,” said Mr. Cohen. He took out his cell phone and called Rabbi Dayan.

“We really appreciate your efforts in straightening the shul,” said Mr. Reiss. “How is it going?”

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/judaism/halacha-hashkafa/public-passage/2013/05/01/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: