Bava Kamma 35B

שניהם פטורים. אם היו שניהם של איש אחד ⁠– שניהם חייבים.

the two of them are exempt, since each of them rejects the claim of the injured party that his ox caused the injury. If both oxen belonged to one person, both are liable, as will be explained in the Talmud.

היה אחד גדול ואחד קטן, הניזק אומר: ״גדול הזיק״, והמזיק אומר: ״לא כי, אלא קטן הזיק״; אחד תם ואחד מועד, הניזק אומר: ״מועד הזיק״, והמזיק אומר: ״לא כי, אלא תם הזיק״⁠ – המוציא מחבירו עליו הראיה.

If the pursuing oxen both belonged to one person, and were both innocuous, so that restitution is paid exclusively from proceeds of the sale of the belligerent ox, and one was large and the other one small, in this case, if the injured party says that the large ox caused the damage, and he is therefore entitled to receive restitution for half the damage from the value of the large ox, but the one liable for damage says: No; rather, the small ox caused the damage, and half of its value is not sufficient to cover half the damage; or, similarly, in a case where one ox is innocuous and one is forewarned, and the injured party says: The forewarned ox caused the damage, and the injured party is therefore eligible to receive full damages, but the one liable for damage says: No; rather, the innocuous ox caused the damage, in which case he is liable to pay only half the damage; in both of the above cases, the principle is that the burden of proof rests upon the claimant.

היו הניזקין שנים ⁠– אחד גדול ואחד קטן, והמזיקין שנים ⁠– אחד גדול ואחד קטן; הניזק אומר: ״גדול הזיק את הגדול, וקטן את הקטן״, והמזיק אומר: ״לא כי, אלא קטן את הגדול, וגדול את הקטן״; אחד תם ואחד מועד, הניזק אומר: ״מועד הזיק את הגדול, ותם את הקטן״, והמזיק אומר: ״לא כי, אלא תם את הגדול, ומועד את הקטן״⁠ – המוציא מחבירו עליו הראיה.

If the injured animals were two oxen, one large and the other one small, and the ones that caused the damage were also two oxen, one large and one small, and the injured party says: The large one injured the large one and the small one injured the small one, and the one liable for damage says: No; rather, the small one injured the large one, in which case, if half the value of the belligerent ox does not cover half the damage, he is not required to pay more, and the large one injured the small one; or, similarly, if one of the belligerent oxen was innocuous and one forewarned, and the injured party says: The forewarned ox injured the large one, and the innocuous ox injured the small one, and the one liable for damage says: No; rather, the innocuous ox injured the large one and the forewarned ox injured the small one; here too, the burden of proof rests upon the claimant.