brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
& Revach l'Neshamah - http://www.revach.net
1. Dinei Mamonos are adjudicated by three judges.
2. If a borrower wants to go to the local Beis Din, the lender may insist that the case be brought before the Beis ha'Va'ad (a more important Beis Din).
3. A witness should not sign on a Shtar unless he knows who else is signing on it.
4. A litigant has the right to reject a judge who was chosen by the other party.
5. Two litigants may agree to allow a relative to judge their case.
6. Rebbi Elazar explains that the Machlokes between Rebbi Meir and the Chachamim in the Mishnah is regarding whether one of the litigants may testify, along with another person, that one of the witnesses in his court case is not a valid witness.
7. Rav Dimi in the name of Rebbi Yochanan explains that the dispute between Rebbi Meir and the Chachamim is whether a litigant who claims to have two sets of witnesses is required to bring both sets to Beis Din.
8. If a litigant has a Chazakah on land and claims that the Shtar is still in his possession, there is a dispute between Rebbi and Rebbi Shimon Ben Gamliel as to whether he is required to bring the Shtar to Beis Din.
A BIT MORE
1. According to the Chachamim, each of the two litigants in a case picks one judge, and the two judges together choose a third judge. Rebbi Meir maintains that the third judge must be agreed upon by the two litigants.
2. A lender has the right to force the borrower to go to the Beis ha'Va'ad, but due to the principle that a borrower is like a servant to the lender, a borrower cannot compel the lender to bring the case to the Beis ha'Va'ad. A borrower does have the right, however, to insist on a different Beis Din if the judges in the city are not well-versed in Torah law. Furthermore, if there are two Batei Din in the same city, the borrower may insist that the case be brought before a specific Beis Din out of the two.
3. The Nekiyei ha'Da'as in Yerushalayim would not sign on a Shtar unless they knew who the other witnesses on the Shtar would be. They were concerned that if they were to sign a Shtar without being aware of the identities of the other witnesses, the Shtar might be signed by a witness who was Pasul, which would compromise their testimony and cause them to be embarrassed. They also would not agree to judge a case in Beis Din unless they knew who the other judges would be. Furthermore, they would not partake of a Se'udah unless they knew who else was attending, because it would be a disgrace for a Talmid Chacham to sit at a Se'udah with an Am ha'Aretz.
4. According to Rebbi Meir, if one of the litigants chooses a non-expert judge, the other party can refuse to accept him. The Chachamim maintain that a litigant can reject a judge only if he is a relative or is otherwise Pasul to serve as a judge.
5. The litigants in a court case may make an agreement to allow their case to be judged by a relative or by three shepherds, who would not ordinarily be allowed to serve as judges. According to Rebbi Meir, either litigant has the right to retract his agreement. The Chachamim, however, maintain that he may not retract it.
6. Both Rebbi Meir and the Chachamim agree that a litigant in a case is not believed if he testifies that one of the witnesses is Pasul because he is a Gazlan. In such a case, the litigant's testimony is not accepted because the litigant is Nogei'a (he has a personal interest in having his testimony accepted). However, if a litigant comes to testify, along with another person, that the witness is a member of a family of slaves (who are not valid witnesses in Beis Din), Rebbi Meir maintains that their testimony is accepted. Even though the litigant stands to gain if Beis Din rules that the witness is a slave (because the witness will be unable to testify against him), he is not considered Nogei'a because his testimony relates to the entire family and not just to the one witness alone. The Chachamim, however, maintain that a litigant is not believed even when he testifies that a witness is from a family of slaves.
7. Rebbi Meir maintains that a litigant who claims to have two sets of witnesses is not required to bring both sets of witnesses to Beis Din; therefore, even if one of the sets of witnesses is found to be Pasul, the other set of witnesses can support his claim if they are Kosher witnesses. Thus, the other litigant would be believed if he testifies, along with another person, that one of the sets of witnesses is Pasul. He would not be considered Nogei'a because even if one set of witnesses is disqualified, the other litigant will still have another set who can testify for him. The Chachamim, however, maintain that a litigant who claims to have two sets of witnesses must bring both to Beis Din, and if one set is found to be Pasul the Beis Din will not accept the other set of witnesses alone. Thus, even if a litigant wishes to testify only against one of his opponent's set of witnesses, he is considered Nogei'a because if the other litigant loses even one set of witnesses, Beis Din will not accept his claim.
8. Rebbi maintains that since the litigant claims that he has the Shtar, he must produce it even though he has a Chazakah of three years on the land. Rebbi Shimon Ben Gamliel maintains that since a Chazakah is in lieu of a Shtar, he is not obligated to produce the Shtar as long as he brings witnesses to testify to his Chazakah of three years.
Next Daf Index to Revach for Maseches Sanhedrin