Translation:Shulchan Aruch/Choshen Mishpat/190

Paragraph 1- Real property can be acquired in one of four ways: money, document, taking possession and a kerchief-kinyan. The same rules that apply to sales apply to property-rentals for the all the days of the rental. See later Siman 195.

Paragraph 2- What is the process for a kinyan with money? If the seller sold the buyer a house or field and the buyer gave him money worth a perutah, he will have acquired the property and neither party can retract. Even if the buyer gave the money with the condition it be returned, the buyer would still acquire the property.

Paragraph 3- If one tells another to give a maneh to so and so and with that acquire my property, once the buyer gives the money he will have acquired the property.

Paragraph 4- There are those who say that the same applies where one tells another, here is a maneh and your field shall be sold to so and so, and once the seller accepts the money, such so and so would acquire the field so long as that so and so wants the property, such as where he appointed the donor to be an agent or he told the seller that he should acquire the seller’s property once so and so gives you money.

Paragraph 5- Similarly, there are those who say that the same would apply where one tells another, give a maneh to so and so and my field will be sold to so and so, and once such so and so receives the money, he would acquire that field so long as the buyer wants the field in the manner that was discussed earlier.

Paragraph 6- Similarly, there are those who say that the same would apply where one says to another, here is a maneh and my field will be sold to you, and once the buyer receives the maneh he will have acquired the field so long as the recipient is a prestigious person where the seller receives benefit from the fact that the recipient accepted the maneh from him. If Reuven owed Shimon a maneh and the time for repayment had arrived, and Shimon told Reuven that he will sell him real property for a maneh and Reuven agreed and gave him a maneh, Shimon cannot say that this maneh he is collecting is for the debt. Rather, Reuven will have acquired the property and Shimon can then collect his debt.

Paragraph 7- When is it true that one acquires with just money? In a place where it is not the practice to write with a document. In a place where they write with a document, however, one would not acquire until the document is written.

Paragraph 8- If the buyer made a condition and said if he wants he will acquire with money and if he wants he will acquire with a document, and he gave money under this condition, the condition would be effective and the seller cannot retract because of the condition, but the buyer can retract until the seller writes a document for him. Similarly, if the seller made this condition, the effectiveness of the sale would be dependent on him.

Paragraph 9- If one was acquiring real property from another and they set a price and the buyer gave collateral on the money, he would not acquire the property, and either of the parties can retract. If the buyer said to the seller that he should acquire the actual collateral corresponding to the money that is owed, however, he would acquire the property. See later in 204:5.

Paragraph 10- If one sells a field to another for 1,000 zuz and the buyer gave some of the money, and the seller was coming and going to demand the remainder, even if it was only one zuz, the buyer would not acquire the entire field, even if the document was written or the buyer took possession. If the buyer retracted, the seller would have the upper hand. If he wants he can say here is your money or the buyer will acquire the amount of the field that corresponds to the money that was given. He can give him from the inferior part of the field. He would give the field based on the current market rate. If the seller retracts, the buyer would have the upper hand. If he wants he can say give me money or give me property corresponding to the amount of money I gave, and he would take from the superior part of the field based on the market rate that they agreed on. If the seller was not coming and going to make a claim, the buyer would acquire the entire field and neither party can retract. The remaining money would be like any other debt. Similarly, if they converted the remaining money to a loan, even if the seller would be coming and going, the buyer will have acquired the field. This is only where he gave some money as a form of payment. If he only gave the money as escrow, however, even if the seller did not come and go, he would only acquire the amount corresponding to the amount given, unless he explicitly said he was acquiring the entire amount, and both parties can retract. He would only acquire the corresponding amount from the inferior portion of the field.

Paragraph 11- If one sold his field because of its inferior quality, even if he was coming and going and claiming the remainder of the money, the purchaser will have acquired the entirety of the field and would not be able retract because the reason the seller is pursuing him to pay is not because he has not completely granted ownership but just to avoid having the buyer retract. The same is true when one sells movable times, and if buyer has pulled the fruits into his possession, and the seller is coming and going for the remaining money, the buyer will not have acquired all the fruits and the party that retracts will have the lower hand as was discussed, unless the seller was selling it because of its inferior quality, in which case the buyer would acquire everything.

Paragraph 12- If one sold his properties because he wants to go live in another city, it is as if he sold because of the properties’ inferior quality.

Paragraph 13- If one purchased a field worth 100 for 200 and gave some of the money, and the seller comes and goes to claim the remainder, it is unclear whether it has the status of one who sells because of inferior quality or not. Therefore, if either one of them wants to retract he cannot do so. If the seller seizes an amount corresponding to the unpaid amount from the item that was sold, we would not take it away from him.

Paragraph 14- If one wanted to sell a field for 100 but could not find a buyer who wanted a field worth 100 and he was forced to sell one worth 200, and he accepted some of the money and was coming and going on the rest, the buyer would not acquire the field and both parties can retract. If it was a situation where had he pushed himself he would have a buyer of his field for 100, but he did not push himself, however, and ended up selling for 200, the status would be uncertain. Therefore, neither of the parties could retract but if the seller seizes an amount corresponding to the unpaid amount from the item that was sold, we would not take it away from him.

Paragraph 15- This that we said that when the seller is coming and going for the remaining money the buyer will not have acquired the property is only where we know the seller only sold the property because he needed the money. Even if a time was set for repayment, if when the time arrived the seller pressured the buyer to pay and the buyer pushed him off and the judge sees the seller is now pressed for money and he is coming and going, the buyer will not acquire the field.

Paragraph 16- There are those who say that coming and going for the remaining money means he came to the buyer twice to ask him for his money, regardless of whether he found the buyer and asked him for the money or if he did not find him but revealed his intention to go ask him for it. It only applies where the seller came and went on the date they made up he would pay [See Sm”a] or the day before. If he did not come and go until the next day, however, the seller would not be able to retract. Where he did come and go on that day, even if he was later silent for many days, he still retains the right to retract. If the seller came and went two times on that day and the buyer did not give him the money, and before the day was up the buyer brought the money, the buyer would acquire the property and the seller cannot retract, because when one pays on that day it is as if he paid immediately. Similarly, there are those who say that this that we say that the buyer acquires the amount corresponding to what he paid is only in a situation where money would acquire without a document. In a place where a document is required, however, a document cannot partially acquire and in any case where one has not acquired the entire amount, he would not even acquire a partial amount. If they made a condition, however, we would follow whatever the condition was.

Paragraph 17- Movable items have the same status as real property for this concept and even if the buyer took possession of the item and the seller is coming and going for the remaining money, the buyer would not acquire the item. There is, however, one point of distinction with respect to movable items. If it is an item that cannot be divided, such as where the seller sold a living item and the buyer gave some of the money and the seller is coming and going for the rest, the sale would be completely void because the item is not intended to be divided and the seller does not want to partner with the buyer. If he said explicitly the money he’s giving should acquire, however, he would acquire the amount corresponding to the money paid. With respect to an item that can be divided, however, only the amount owed would be voided.

Paragraph 18- If one acquired an item from another and paid for it but erred in the amount of money, and the seller subsequently make a claim and said the 100 you gave me was actually only 90, the item is acquired by the buyer and he must pay the remaining 10, even if it was many years later and regardless of whether it was real property or movable items. If rumors were spread on an individual, and in order to get rid of any property he sold his properties and accepted the money, when the rumors cease the sale is void, even if they later agreed to a sale, because once the original document that was created was worthless since it was made just to dispose his property, the document is now a pre-dated document and is thus invalid.