Translation:Shulchan Aruch/Choshen Mishpat/393

Paragraph 1- If one brings his fruits to another’s courtyard without permission, and the owner’s animal ate the fruits, the owner would be exempt. Even if the owner was grinding and this visitor brought wheat for him to grind so that the owner of the courtyard can profit, it would still be considered entering without permission. If the owner slipped on the fruit and was damaged, the owner of the fruit would be liable. If he entered with permission, he would be exempt. There are those who disagree, as will be discussed later at the end of Siman 398. If the owner accepted to watch the fruits, the owner would be liable.

Paragraph 2- If he brought the fruits in without permission, and the owner’s animal ate the fruits and was damaged from eating them, the owner of the fruits would be exempt because the animal should not have eaten them.

Paragraph 3- If he brought the fruits in with permission, and the owner of the courtyard permitted him to place them in the courtyard to be watched, and the owner’s animals ate them and was damaged from eating them, the owner of the fruits would be liable, because since he saw the animal eating things that damage it and he let it do so, he is liable. The owner of the courtyard was not required to remove his animals from there. An incident occurred where a woman entered her neighbor’s home to knead and bake, and they left her there and were hidden so that they would not look while she was kneading and baking, and the owner’s goat came and ate the dough and died, and the rabbis required her to pay for the value of the goat. The same applies to anything similar.

Paragraph 4- If one stacks in another’s field without his permission, and the animal of the field-owner eats the produce, he would be exempt. If the animal slipped on it and was damaged, the owner of the fruits would be liable. If the animal ate it and was damaged from eating, the owner of the fruits would be exempt. If he stacked with the field-owner’s permission, the owner of the field would be liable, even if he did not agree to watch it, because when it comes to one watching granaries, as soon as he says to stack it is as if he said stack and I will watch.