Translation:Shulchan Aruch/Choshen Mishpat/251

Paragraph 1- If one gives a gift while he is dying, and writes “while alive and dead” or “from while alive and death,” regardless of whether it was a full or partial gift, because he wrote “and in death,” it has the status of a dying-gift. This that it says “and in death” means the recipient should not acquire until after death. This that he said “from while alive,” is just symbolic to put him at ease that he will survive this sickness. If a healthy person wrote from life and death, however, that would be a bona-fide gift while alive and this that he wrote “and in death,” is as if he said “from now until forever” and is like an adornment of the document.

Paragraph 2- If a dying-gift does not state that because of this sickness the deceased instructed, and the witnesses are not accessible to ask them- the witnesses are able to rely on their own judgement or on the judgement of the sick person’s attendants who say that the sickness took a turn for the worse and he passed way, in which can they can then testify accordingly- even though the person who instructed is now dead, the gift is void because his death is no proof. He may have been healed from the sickness that he gave from and then was affected by another sickness and died. Thus, the properties would remain in the possession of the inheritors, until the recipients can prove he died from the sickness he gave the gift from. If the recipient grabbed movable items, because he can say they are mine, he is believed to say the deceased died from the first sickness. The same is true where the sick person got up and wants to retract his gift and claims the gift was a dying-gift and the recipient says he was healthy and thus cannot retract, and the recipient would have the burden of proof. The same is true in any situation where is there is a dispute among rabbinic authorities whether one acquired, and the recipient has the burden of proof.