Translation:Shulchan Aruch/Choshen Mishpat/143

Paragraph 1- If the possessor took possession of real property for less than three years, he will not obtain a presumption, even if he took possession in the objector’s presence. If he took possession for three years, he will obtain a presumption, even if he took possession outside the objector’s presence, who was in a different country, so long as there are frequent caravans between the place he took possession and the location of the property. If there was war or a road blockage between the two places, however, the possessor would not obtain a presumption. Even if there are witnesses attesting that the objector came to the market here and remained for 30 days, which were the last 30 days of the three years, such that if the objector did not object now he will not have any further time to object, the objector can still say that those 30 days he was here he was preoccupied with his business and was unaware that the possessor had possession of my house. This assumes the objector had another house to live in. There are those that say that this law only applies in villages, where the people are very busy in their marketplaces. There are those that say that we can learn from here that we always follow the end of the three year period. If the objector was in a place that he could not object at the beginning of the three years, but in the end he was at a place where he could object, the presumption would be valid. If he originally was in a place where he could object but at the end was in a place where he could not, the presumption would not be valid because we can say that the reason he did not object originally was because he assumed would be able to object in the end and return but ended up not being able to.

Paragraph 2- The foregoing was only said where it is known that the objector was not in the country. If the matter is unknown, however, we would not listen to the objector when he says he was not here until he can prove it with witnesses.

Paragraph 3- If the objector fled because his life was in danger, we would not allow one to obtain a presumption on his properties, because the objector is afraid to object lest they find out his location and pursue him. If he fled for monetary reasons, however, one could obtain a presumption because the objector is not that afraid.

Paragraph 4- There are those who say that one cannot obtain a presumption on property belonging to captives, property where the whereabouts of the owner are unknown or properties belong to fools because in all these cases the owner is unable to object because they don’t know who is possessing their property given the fact that they are preoccupied.