Translation:Shulchan Aruch/Choshen Mishpat/402

Paragraph 1- If two unwarned oxen injured each other, one owner would pay half the difference in damage. How so? For example, if one ox injured another worth 100 and the second ox injured an ox worth 50, 50 cancels out 50, and the owner would pay from the remaining half, even if one of the oxen were misplaced. This is only where each ox is worth the value it damaged. If it is not worth that much, however, we would only deduct that which can be collected from the actual animal. If they were both warned, the owner would pay for the full difference in damage. If one was unwarned and the other was warned, and the warned one damaged the unwarned one more that it was damaged, the owner would pay the full difference in damage. For example, if the warned ox caused a damage of 100 on the unwarned ox, and the unwarned ox only caused a damage of 50 on the warned one, the owner would pay 75. In a case where the unwarned pays the warned, he would pay half the damage. For example, if the unwarned caused a damage of 100 on the warned, and the warned only caused a damage of 25 on the unwarned, the owner would pay 25. There are those who say that this is only where they started injuring each other at the same time or where after the injuring ox separated from the victim, the second ox then injured the first ox. If one ox started up, however, the owner of that ox would pay and the second would be exempt because in any case where one deviated and the other responded by deviating, the second is exempt. We find this concept later in 421:13 in a case where two people injured each other. The Mechaber who here rules like the opinion that disagree and holds there is no distinction, whereas later he rules in accordance with the opinion I wrote, did not have the cases conform properly.