“Second, we mentioned that the nail sticking out of the fence is included in the category of bor. The Torah limits the liability of bor significantly and excludes damage to inanimate objects, such as clothing. There is legal liability only for an animal [e.g., ox or donkey] or for a person who was injured.” (C.M. 410:21)
“And there’s no responsibility whatsoever for damage to clothing, even if the person knowingly left a loose nail jutting out?!” asked Mr. Simon incredulously.
“The Gemara [B.K. 29a; 56a] indicates that there is a chiyuv b’dinei shamayim, a strong moral obligation, if the person intended to damage,” concluded Rabbi Dayan. “If he did not intend to damage, Rav S.Z. Auerbach maintains there is no moral obligation [Minchas Shlomo] B.K. 29:4); the Chazon Ishremains doubtful; and Birkas Shmuel takes for granted that there is a chiyuv b’dinei shamayim. In practice, it is recommended to pay partially.” (Pischei Choshen, Nezikin 1:1; 9:53)
“Nonetheless, if the law of the land requires payment also for damage to inanimate objects” concluded Rabbi Dayan, “it would have halachic consequence since this is morally proper also according to halacha.” (See C.M. 259:7; 356:7)
