‫הלכות נזקי ממון‬

‫פרק שביעי‬
Siman: ‫איזה סכום‬
TRUNK BRANCHES LEAVES
1. The owner of a ‫ תם‬animal guarded with ‫ שמירה פחותה‬pays for the
damages his animal caused. If his animal became a ‫ מועד‬for ‫קרן‬, then the
A ‫ תם‬that ‫ שמירה פחותה‬only exempts the ‫ מועד‬component of the animal, but not its
became a ‫ תם‬component.
‫ מועד‬remains 2. If the animal’s left horn was classified as a ‫ תם‬and its right horn a ‫מועד‬, its
a ‫תם‬ owner pays ‫ חצי נזק‬regardless of which horn it gored with. The left horn
as ‫ תם‬pays ‫חצי נזק‬, and the right horn, is considered to have both a ‫תם‬
and ‫ מועד‬component within it. ‫ שמירה פחותה‬only exempts the owner on
the ‫ מועד‬component but not the ‫ תם‬component, therefore, the owner pays
‫ חצי נזק‬regardless of which horn it gored with.
3. a) An animal that damages a person only pays ‫ נזק‬of the 5 payments. b)
If the animal only embarrasses the victim, its owner does not pay
Animals pay anything at all. c) ‫ קים ליה דרבה מינה‬does not apply to an animal.
only ‫נזק‬ Therefore, if the animal wounds its owner’s parent, the owner pays.
Furthermore, if it causes another’s haystack to burn on Shabbos, the
Which ‫דין‬ owner pays for it.
applies 4. A ‫ תם‬animal pays ‫ חצי נזק‬for ‫ קרן‬in the ‫רשות הניזק‬. (We don’t accept the
argument that since he is ‫ חייב חצי נזק‬for ‫ קרן‬in the ‫רה"ר‬, that therefore he
pays ‫ נזק שלם‬in the ‫רשות הניזק‬.)
5. If the animal immediately ruins the water in the ‫’ניזק‬s well, then its owner
pays for the full damages to the water. (‫ )רגל‬However, if the water
became damaged only after the animal was in the well for a period of
Cases time, then the owner is ‫פטור‬, because the animal is considered to have
where Animals in a become a ‫ בור‬and as such does not pay for damages to ‫כלים‬. (The water)
‫ בור‬and 6. The animal’s owner pays for the hole his animal dug on the ‫‘ניזק‬s
there are making a ‫בור‬
two property, but is ‫ פטור‬from paying for damages caused through the ‫בור‬.
The ‫ בעל החצר‬is ‫ חייב‬to pay for damages caused by the ‫ בור‬because he
potential was obligated to cover it.
amounts 7. The ‫ בעל החצר‬is exempt for damages he accidentally caused to an animal
to pay that entered his property without ‫רשות‬, but is ‫ חייב‬for purposely damaging
it. He can remove the animal, but not damage it.
8. Regarding damages for ‫ נזיקין‬you don’t pay replacement value, but rather
you either pay for the full depreciation (if the damaging animal was a
Damage is ‫ )מועד‬or for half the depreciation (if the damaging animal was a ‫)תם‬. In
depreciation general, if the ‫ נבילה‬depreciated in value from the time it was killed to the
time of the court case, this loss is absorbed by the ‫ניזק‬. However,
appreciation of the ‫ נבילה‬is divided by the ‫ מזיק‬and ‫ניזק‬.
9. The ‫ מזיק‬does not pay for the further depreciation of the ‫ נבילה‬from the
time it was killed until the court case, but rather the ‫ ניזק‬absorbs this loss.
Further (He is negligent for not selling it as soon as it died.) For example, if the
depreciation animal was worth 200 when alive and its 100 ‫נבילה‬, the ‫ מזיק‬only pays
of the ‫נבילה‬ 100 (‫ )מועד‬or 50 (‫)תם‬, even if the ‫ נבילה‬drops in value 100-80 from the
time of its death until the court case.
Which 10. The ‫ מזיק וניזק‬split the appreciated value of a ‫נבילה‬. Therefore ½ the
value of appreciation is deducted from what the ‫ מזיק‬pays the ‫ניזק‬. For example, if
the ‫ניזק‬ the ‫ נבילה‬was now worth 120 at the time of the court case the increase of
or ‫מזיק‬ 20 is divided between them and, the ‫ מזיק‬pays 90 (‫ )מועד‬or 45 (‫)תם‬.
applies Appreciation 11. The ‫ מזיק‬does not pay for a “would be increase” in the animal’s value had
of the ‫נבילה‬ his animal not damaged it. (For example, it increased in value to 400 and
would have increased to 800 if not for the injury.) However, he does pay
for the continuing depreciation from the time of the wounding of the ‫’ניזק‬s
animal until the court case. (In this case the ‫ נזק‬is not negligent for not
selling his animal, because he hopes it will improve.)
12. If the value of the ‫‘מזיק‬s animal increased in value by itself, then the new
The ‫מזיק‬ increased value is considered the amount used for ‫מגופו‬. However if the
appreciates value was increased artificially by its owner, e.g. he fattened it, we don’t
raise the ceiling of ‫ מגופו‬to this new increased value.
When 13. The ‫ מזיק‬pays for the cost of transporting the ‫ נבילה‬to the ‫ ניזק‬and only
depreciation then is the depreciation evaluated. This is derived from the Possuk,
is determined Exodus 21:34, "‫"כסף ישיב לבעליו והמת יהיה לו‬.