Translation:Shulchan Aruch/Choshen Mishpat/47

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Paragraph 1- If a lender says that the document in his possession was given on trust or was paid back, the lender owes other people money and has nothing else to pay them back with other than this document, the document contains a believability clause and the document was affirmed in court or was being held by a third party, the lender is not believed. Even if we were unaware at the time of his admission that he owed others money and we only discovered this later, he would not be believed since he is coming to negatively impact others. The lender is not even believed where he is negatively impacting himself too, such as where the document is for 200 and he only owes others 100. If after the lender said the document was given on trust, he paid back his creditor and he now wants to use this document to collect from the borrower we analyze the situation. If he said it was given on trust when his creditor came to collect from this document then we say his intent was certainly just to push away his creditor. If, however, he confessed that the document was given on trust without his creditor making a claim, then he cannot retract and collect with the document.

Paragraph 2-If the lender says this document is accurate in that the borrower told the witnesses to write it for 1,000 dinar but he trusted me to only claim 500 dinar, the document is valid. If, however, he says that witnesses erred when they wrote 1,000 dinar, the document is considered like pottery. Even if the document contained a believability clause, the borrower would take a heses oath and be exempt. If one says that the a document in his possession belongs to others, see later Siman 99.