Translation:Shulchan Aruch/Choshen Mishpat/16

Paragraph 1- If one of the parties says I have witnesses I want to bring, we give him 30 days. Once the 30 days have passed, we rule on the case and he must pay. If he subsequently brings the witnesses, they can void the ruling. If it was clear to the court that two specific individuals had witnessed the matter but were far away, the court can give him the time required to bring them. ''The same concept applies if it is clear that the matter can be resolved in less than 30 days- they do not give him extra time for naught. See later 88:4.''

Paragraph 2- This that we give 30 days is only where they called the party originally without any proof and the court required him to swear and the plaintiff claims that I have a proof which is not accessible to me and he does not want to accept the defendant’s oath. In such a case we give a 30-day period. If, however, the plaintiff originally claims I have a proof that is not accessible, what point is there to give a time-period? When the proof arrives, the defendant can respond. So long as he has not brought the proof, the defendant does not need to respond. If the plaintiff then says I don’t have a proof, the defendant should respond without the plaintiff’s proof. There are those that say that the defendant can swear and will be exempt and the plaintiff can no longer bring a proof. ''If the defendant requests time to respond to the plaintiff’s claim, if it seems to the court that he just pushing them off, they should not grant the request and the defendant must respond immediately. If, however, it seems to the court that he needs time to process and understand his personal matters, we give him the necessary time. If the document says he must pay without pushing off, it is a monetary condition, which always is valid.''

Paragraph 3- If one of the parties claims that he has witnesses or some other proof but he doesn’t know who has it, the judge is required to place a cherem on anyone that can support his case with witnesses or a proof that he must inform the judge. Even his counterparty is required to notify the judge if he is the individual with the witnesses or the proof. ''See later 71:7 for how we place a cherem. See later 92:6 for whether we place a cherem where he claims his counterparty claims is disqualified from taking an oath.''

Paragraph 4. If a party tells his adversary that I have a merit on the document that you have, the adversary must produce the document if he concedes that he has it. The court will then write down what merit is written in that document. If, however, the adversary claims that there is no merit in the document, we do not require him to show the document to anyone. However, if the party wants to place a general cherem on anyone that has a document that supports him that he must show it, we place the cherem. If he claims that he is certain that an individual has a document with a merit for him, the individual will swear a heses oath that he does not have it.

Paragraph 5- If one produces a document against his adversary, and the adversary claims it is forged and asks to see a copy of the document in order to analyze it, we provide it to him even if the document says no copies should be made.