Translation:Shulchan Aruch/Choshen Mishpat/424

Paragraph 1- If one injures his father or mother but no blood came out, he would liable for all five categories. If blood came out, he is sentenced to death and thus would be exempt from payment, even if it was unintentional. Thus, a son should not take blood from his father, take out a thorn from his flesh or pop a pimple of his, lest he draw blood. This is discussed in Tur Yoreh Deah Siman 241.

Paragraph 2- If one injures another on Shabbos, he is exempt from paying back, even if it was unintentional, because it is a crime that carries the death penalty. If he injured him on Yom Kippur, however, he would be obligated to pay him, even if he injured him intentionally.

Paragraph 3- If one injures his gentile-slave he is exempt. If others injured him, his master would collect all five categories. Even if they pained him with a medicine and he was cured quickly, the entire medical expense would go to the master.

Paragraph 4- If one was a half-slave/half-free and was struck by a person or gored by an ox, the law is discussed in Tur Yoreh Deah Siman 267.

Paragraph 5- If a slave was set free but did not yet receive his emancipation-document, and others injured him, they would be exempt.

Paragraph 6- If one injures another’s minor daughter, and the damage depreciates her value, the damage will go to the father. The lost work would go to the father as well because he receives her work and the money for her sale. There are those who say this is only where she is supported by her father’s table. If she is not supported by her father’s table, however, the money would go to her. There are others who say that even if she is supported by her father’s table, she would still receive the money where others injured her. With respect to her pain, medical expenses and embarrassment, however, that would go to her. Similarly, if the damage did not decrease her value, it would go to her. Similarly, if one injures his daughter, he must pay her for the pain, medical expenses and embarrassment. It seems to me that this is only where she is not supported by her father’s table. If she is supported by her father’s table, however, there are those who say he is exempt, as is discussed below.

Paragraph 7- If one injures his adult sons that are not supported by his table, he must pay them immediately. If they were minors, he would purchase real property with their damage-money. There are those who say he would purchase a Torah scroll. They would consume the fruits of the property. The same applies where others injure them. If they were supported by his table and he injured them, he would be exempt, regardless of whether they were adults or minors. If others injured them and they were adults, the father would give them the payment immediately. If they were minors, he would purchase real property and he can consume the fruits until they become adults. There are those who say that when they are supported by his table he is only exempt from lost work, but he would still be liable for the other four categories. The law would be the same as it is where others injured them.

Paragraph 8- If one injures a deaf-mute, fool or minor, he is liable. If they injured another, they would be exempt. Even if the deaf-mute is healed, the fool becomes sane or the minor becomes an adult, they would be not be required to pay because at the time they injured they were lacking capacity.

Paragraph 9- If one injures a slave or woman, they would be liable. If they injured others, they would be exempt, but would pay later if the woman got divorced or was widowed or if the slave was freed. If she has usufruct properties or “tzon-barzel” properties, she would sell it to others at her financial value, and she would pay the victim.

Paragraph 10- If a woman injured her husband and she had a surplus in her kesubah or usufruct or “tzon-barzel” properties, we would require her to sell it to her husband at her financial value and he would collect from it, if that is what the husband wants. If he wants to divorce her and collect everything, he can do so. If she does not have any of the foregoing, she cannot sell her primary kesubah because it is forbidden for a husband to keep his wife for one moment without a kesubah. Rather, if the husband wants he can write a document against her for the value of the injury or he can divorce her and take what he deserves from the kesubah. Similarly, if the cost of the injury is equal to the kesubah, she can sell the kesubah to her husband and we are not concerned that it may be light in his eyes to divorce her, because if he wanted he can divorce her and collect the injury from her kesubah.

Paragraph 11- The law of a married woman that is injured by others or her husband is discussed in Tur Even HaEzer Siman 83. If a man and a married woman injured each other, we would not say that one would pay the full value of the difference because some of the injury that occurred to the woman goes to her husband. Therefore, the man would pay her that which her husband receives, and that which she is supposed to receive is offset by the value of the damage she caused.