Sunday, February 15, 2009

Indirect damage revisited

Your 3rd point that the one who burned the document isn't damaging it's the borrower who's damaging is a powerful point. How could Ravah disagree with that?

1 comment:

Menachem said...

Rava agrees that the defendant’s damage is indirect. He, however, is of the opinion that the court can hold a person responsible for indirect damage.
As for the borrower, the court can’t force him to pay beacuse they have no proof that he indeed borrowed.