Translation:Shulchan Aruch/Choshen Mishpat/379

Paragraph 1- If two individuals were travelling in the public domain, and one had his barrel and the other had his beam, and they encountered each other and the barrel broke from the beam, the beam-owner would be exempt because this party has permission to travel and this party had permission to travel.

Paragraph 2- If the beam-owner was first and the barrel-owner was last, and the barrel broke from the beam, the beam-owner would be exempt. If the beam-owner stopped to rest from his heavy burden, he would be liable. If he warned the barrel-owner and told him to stop, he would be exempt. If he stopped to fix his load, even if he did not warn he would be exempt because he was busy and was unable to warn.

Paragraph 3- If the barrel-owner was first and the beam-owner was last, and the barrel broke from the beam, the beam-owner would be liable. If the barrel-owner stopped to rest, he would be exempt. If he warned the beam-owner to stop, the beam-owner would be liable. If he stopped to fix his load, the beam-owner would be exempt, even if he did not warn the barrel-owner. The same would apply where one comes with his candle and the other comes with his flax.

Paragraph 4- If one filled another’s courtyard with barrels of wine and oil, even if he brought the barrels in with permission, because the courtyard-owner did not accept responsibility to watch, he may enter and exit normally and he would be exempt from paying for any barrels that he breaks by entering and exiting. If he broke them intentionally, he would be liable, even if the barrel-owner brought them in without permission.