Kiddushin 60A

ובא אחר ואמר לה: ״הרי את מקודשת לי מעכשיו ולאחר עשרה ימים״, מראשון ומאחרון ⁠– צריכה גט, מאמצעי ⁠– אינה צריכה גט.

and another man came and said to her: You are hereby betrothed to me from now and after 10 days, she requires a bill of divorce from the first man and last man, but she does not require a bill of divorce from the middle one.

מה נפשך ⁠– אי תנאה הואי, דקמא קידושי, דהנך לאו קידושי. אי חזרה הואי, דבתרא קידושי, דהנך לאו קידושי.

Abaye explains: This is the halakha whichever way you look at this case: If this expression is a condition that she should be betrothed from now if he does not retract within 30 days, the betrothal of the first man is a betrothal, whereas the betrothals of those other men are not betrothals. If it is a retraction, i.e., if after saying: From now, he changed his mind and delayed the moment of betrothal, then only that betrothal of the last one is a betrothal, whereas the betrothals of those first two men are not betrothals, as they both postponed their betrothals to a later date. Either way, the betrothal of the middle man is of no consequence.

פשיטא! מהו דתימא: האי לישנא משמע תנאה ומשמע חזרה ותיבעי גיטא מכל חד וחד, קא משמע לן.

The Talmud asks: It is obvious that this is the case; what is the novelty of Abaye’s statement? The Talmud answers: Lest you say that this formulation means a condition and also means a retraction, and therefore she should require a bill of divorce from each and every one of them, including the middle man, due to the uncertainty. It is possible the first man retracted while the second one imposed a condition, in which case only the betrothal of the second person takes effect. Abaye therefore teaches us that according to the opinion of Rav, the uncertainty concerns the meaning of this expression itself, and there is no uncertainty with regard to the intention of each individual person who says this formula. Consequently, there is no possibility that this woman is betrothed to the middle man.