Translation:Shulchan Aruch/Choshen Mishpat/113

Paragraph 1- A creditor can only seize real property from third parties that was sold or gifted by the borrower. If, however, the borrower sold or gifted moveable items, the creditor cannot seize the items, even if they were in the borrower’s possession at the time of the loan. Even if the lender warned the buyers not to acquire the moveable items, the lender would not be able to seize them. If the borrower gifted them as a dying-man gift, the lender may seize them, as will be explained in Siman 252. If the borrower mortgaged moveable items via real property, the lender may seize the moveable items from the buyers just as he can seize the real property, even if he sold the properties before he acquired the moveable items, so long as the borrower wrote to the lender that the requirement was not an asmachta and was not the form of the document or if the borrower wrote that he was mortgaging them now.

Paragraph 2- When the borrower mortgages moveable items via real property, the moveable items do not have to be piled in the real property. Even moveable items that can move around, such as living creatures and slaves, can be mortgaged. Even real property of a tiny size can be used to mortgage many moveable items. If the borrower does not own any real property and the lender grants the borrower ownership of some his own lands with one of the methods used for acquiring real property or if the lender lent or rented him any amount of real property, the lender can make a kinyan on any moveable items he wants via that land. The lender does not have to specify the exact place of the real property he is using to acquire the moveable items. If the lender also does not have real property, he should write “I am granting ownership of four amos in my courtyard and through that property he is granting me ownership in the moveable items,” even if we do not know of any real property belonging to the lender because the admission of a party has the status of 100 witnesses when it is to his detriment.

Paragraph 3- Nowadays, even if the borrower mortgaged moveable items via real property, the lender would not be able to seize moveable items that were sold or gifted because of a “marketplace regulation.” Nevertheless, if the borrower mortgaged properties that he would acquire in the future and subsequently borrowed from someone else and also mortgaged future properties, and in both loans he mortgaged moveable items via real property, and the second creditor prematurely grabbed movable items the borrower had acquired prior to borrowing from him, the first creditor may come and remove those moveable items, even nowadays, because such a case does not qualify for the “market regulation.” See above in Siman 61 and what is similarly written in 37:16.