Ketubot 84B

ורבי עקיבא, תפיסה לא מהניא כלל? אמר רבא אמר רב נחמן: והוא שתפס מחיים.

The Talmud asks: And according to R' Akiva, is the seizure of a debtor’s assets by a creditor, though there are others who have a more immediate right to the assets, not effective at all? Rava said that Rav Naḥman said: And this, that R' Akiva agrees that the seizure of assets is effective, is the case provided that one seized the property from the debtor while he was alive. However, after his death the assets belong to the heirs.

ולרבי טרפון, דמנחי היכא? רב ושמואל דאמרי תרוייהו: והוא שצבורין ומונחין ברשות הרבים, אבל בסימטא ⁠— לא. ורבי יוחנן וריש לקיש דאמרי תרוייהו: אפילו בסימטא.

The Talmud asks: And according to R' Tarfon, who holds that whoever first takes possession of the produce has acquired it, where was this produce placed? The Talmud presents a dispute: There is the opinion of Rav and Shmuel, who both say: And this, that whoever first takes possession of the produce has acquired it, is the halakha provided that the produce is arranged in a pile and placed in the public domain. Since the public domain is not a suitable location for an act of acquisition, anyone can take the produce and acquire it. However, if it is situated in an alley [simta], a place adjacent to the public domain that is rarely frequented by the public, the produce does not belong to the first one who obtains it. Because an acquisition can be performed in an alley, any items that had belonged to the deceased are immediately acquired by the heirs. And there is the opinion of R' Yoḥanan and Reish Lakish, who both say: Even if one seizes produce left in an alley, he acquires it.