“Shalom Robert, this is Shmuli Margulies. You remember that diamond you were looking for? Well, I just received a shipment, and I have a beautiful 2 carat diamond. It is exactly in your price range of $10,000. Would you like to come by to examine and purchase it? Not until next week? Oh, let me get back to you, as I am going out of town next week.” Shmuli hung up the phone and then called his friend and fellow jeweler Howard Ratner.  “Howard. I am in Antwerp next week, but I have a customer who wants to look at this 2 Ct diamond. Can I give it to you to store in your safe? He’ll come by, examine it, and if he wants it, he’ll give you $10k. Yes. Good!” Later that day, Shmuli gave Howard a sealed envelope which Howard immediately put into his safe. 

A week later Shmuli comes into Howard’s store. “I heard that Robert wasn’t interested in the diamond, so I’ll take it back now.” Howard opens the safe but the envelope with the diamond is gone! “I am really sorry, Shmuli, but it has been so busy, I haven’t a clue what happened to the envelope. But I can think of three reasonable possibilities:

1. I returned it to you already, but I don’t remember.
2. I gave it to Robert, and he kept it.
3. Someone stole it.

“By the way, I never opened the envelope, so I am not even sure that there was a diamond of any value inside!” The case eventually makes it way to the Yorkville Beis Din, where they determined that this case was identical to the one poskened by Rav Moshe Feinstein, zt"l, (other than the value of the diamond), and they also ruled the same: That Howard was obligated to pay $2,222 to Shmuli for the lost diamond. Please explain how the Beis Din calculated this number.

Rabbi Margulies began a course in Kashrus at The Fallsdale Kollel, and each graduate would receive semicha from him at the end of 2 years of study in the area of Kashrus. What power does this semicha have?

1. It is "True" semicha, and the recipient can pasken on all matters.
2. It is not "True" semicha, but nonetheless the recipient can pasken on all matters.
3. It is not "True" semicha, and the recipient cannot pasken on all matters.

The Yorkville Beis Din tried to properly enforce the rulings of the Gemora, but nevertheless was somewhat restricted compared to a Beis Din from 2000 years ago. Please select all of the actions that a Beis Din can still do today:

1. Collect all types of fines.
2. Force a party to take an oath (shavua).
3. Mediate a compromise between the parties.
4. Collect a fee for their services.

Rabbi Margulies finished his kashrus course and during a gala ceremony gave over semicha to his students. Should Rabbi Margulies place his hands on the heads of the students when he does this? What if Rabbi Margulies was living in the time of the Gemora?

1. He should place his hands on the heads of the students in both cases.
2. He should not place his hands on the heads of the students today, but in the time of the gemora he should.
3. He should not place his hands on the heads of the students in both cases.

"It clearly states that Mr. Silverman owes me $1000 and was supposed to pay me back 6 months ago," said a frustrated Mr. Goldberg to Rabbi Cohen, as he showed him the loan contract. "I have no choice but to take him to Beis Din now! as he denies the loan" "Wait, a moment," interrupted Lenny (the "louse"), "let me see that contract!" as he pulled it out of Mr. Goldberg's hands. But after examining it for a moment, Lenny ripped up the contract and even swallowed the paper that had most of Mr. Silverman's signature on it! What power does Beis Din have right now:

1. Beis Din can force Mr. Silverman to pay Mr. Goldberg $1000, even though he denies it and there is no existing contract.
2. Beis Din can force Lenny (the "louse") to pay $1000 to Mr. Goldberg, as when he ripped up the loan contract, he has caused Mr. Goldberg a loss, as he can no longer prove the loan.
3. Beis Din has no power to do anything in this case.

Hertzl gave Elky a get in the Yorkville Beis Din and Elky gained custody of their son Gidon. According to the divorce agreement, Hertzl was to pay $400/month to Elky for child support. But after a few months, Hertzl stopped paying the child support. Can the Yorkville Beis Din force Hertzl to pay Elky this child support?

Lenny (the "louse") purposefully damaged Mr. Goldberg, causing him a loss of a few thousand dollars. Mr. Goldberg filed a claim against Lenny in the Yorkville Beis Din, but Lenny's lawyer responded that the court did not have standing to try the case and therefore Lenny would not appear. The Court Secretary admitted to Mr. Goldberg that the court had no standing, since a "modern Beis Din" does not have the power that a "real" Beis Din of 2000 years ago had. Is there anything that the Yorkville Beis Din can do in this case?

1. No, as they no longer have authority in this area.
2. Yes. They can try Lenny in absentia and put a lien on his property to collect money from him.
3. Yes. They can put Lenny in nidui (excommunication) until he follows the rulings of the Beis Din.

Mrs. Annie Silver was raped by Josh Feldman, the repairman,in her home after he had repaired the refrigerator. Josh took advantage of the fact that they were alone (Annie's husband was at work) and the house was locked. Annie was too traumatized to discuss this with the police, so her husband brought over Rabbi Cohen who listened to her story. As Josh Feldman was a respected man in the community, Rabbi Cohen brought in two other Rabbis from the Yorkville Beis Din to listen to Annie's testimony (as well as the testimony from Mr. Rosenstark who saw Josh enter and exit the home rather rushed). The three Rabbis felt that there was merit to Annie's story, but agreed that there was no real proof or witnesses to back the story. What options are available to the Beis Din now.

1. There are no options available since there is only circumstantial evidence.
2. The Beis Din can move forward with the case against Josh, even with the insufficient evidence.
3. The Beis Din can contact the police directly and allow them and the secular courts to punish Josh according to the secular laws.

Levy and Yocheved tried to go out for a meal while vacationing in Fallsdale, but couldn't find any restaurants - except for Moishe's Pizza, a fruit bar and a Shabbos take-out store. While Yocheved was disappointed, Levy saw this as an excellent business opportunity, and within a few months had opened "Levy's Burgers". But rather than use the Fallsdale Vaad HaKashrus, headed by Rabbi Margulies, Levy had the restaurant certified by the respected Yorkville Vaad - from his hometown. While Rabbi Margulies recognized the Yorkville Vaad as being very reliable, he felt that bringing in another Rabbi to give a hechsher would ultimately result in other non-reliable Rabbis to be brought in to give a hechsher. Which is a valid option for Rabbi Margulies and the Vaad Hakashrus?

1. They must accept the hechsher from the Yorkville Vaad, and only when a non-reliable Rabbi attempts to give a hechsher to a local food establishment can they take action.
2. They can put the burger shop in cherem and forbid all the members of the community to eat there.
3. They can sue Levy in Beis Din for the money they lost because the burger shop is using a different hechsher.

"Levy, the stock went down, and is now at the price you wanted to buy it, at $3/share. Should I buy one million shares for you?" Levy looked up at Jonathan, thought for a moment, and then gave a thumbs-up. But at the end of the trading day when it came time to close the finances on the deal, the stock had fallen to $1/share, and Levy was balking at transferring the $3 million to cover the trade. Both Levy and Jonathan ended up in the Yorkville Beis Din, and while both parties agreed to the series of events that occurred, Levy claimed that a "thumbs up" sign was not a halachically binding sign, as it was not mentioned in the gemora, whereas Jonathan said that in the trading world - or at least in his office since he arrived there many years ago - a "thumbs up" meant that the other party agreed to the trade. How will the Beis Din rule?

1. With Levy - the "thumbs up" is non-binding.
2. With Jonathan - the "thumbs up" is binding.

Mr. Goldberg lost in his monetary case against Lenny (the "louse") in the Yorkville Beis Din. When Mr. Goldberg went to Florida for the winter, he mentioned the case to Rabbi Goodman, and even showed him the transcript of the case and the final judgement. Rabbi Goodman looked over the papers and shook his head saying, "There are just so many mistakes in this ruling that it makes me want to cry!" Can Mr. Goldberg ask the Boca Beis Din to get involved and perhaps retry the case?

1. No.
2. Yes, and they can retry the case based on the transcripts and final written judgement.
3. Yes, but they must have both litigants appear before them.

The company Andy worked for shut down with almost no advance notice, and failed to pay Andy's last paycheck of $2500. Two months later the corporate liquidators came to Andy's home to request that he give back the laptop, laser printer and other various equipment - valued at almost $2500 - that the company gave him for use in his home. Can Andy keep the equipment?

1. No, even though he is owed the money, he may not keep the equipment.
2. Yes, he may keep the equipment.

Dovid Lipshitz was waiting on line to checkout in the Boca Kosher Marketplace when he felt something in his back pocket. He turned around to see a guy with a kipah on his head and Dovid's wallet in his hand! Can Dovid punch this fellow Jew or hit him with a stick?

1. No. He can only threaten him with words?
2. No. He can only sue him in Beis Din for the value of the wallet stolen.
3. Yes. He can defend his property with physical force.

Elky and Hertzl met with the secretary of the Yorkville Beis Din to schedule the date of the giving of the get. "Those dates don't work well for me," said Elky. "Friday the sixth would be much better." Can the Beis Din accommodate Elky's request for a session on Friday?

1. Yes, but only if they begin before chatzos.
2. Yes, but only if they begin before plah hamincha.
3. No.

Mr. Silverman had doubts about lending $1000 to Lenny (the "louse"), but Lenny got Rabbi Cohen to sign as a witness to the contract, so he felt more confident about it. That confidence didn't last long, as Lenny missed the payment date, and then denied taking the loan, claiming the contract was forged. Mr. Silverman had him summoned to the Yorkville Beis Din, which was headed by Rabbi Cohen. Can Rabbi Cohen be one of the three judges on the Beis Din that hears this case?

Ephraim Lebowitz took Dovid Lipshitz to the Boca Beis Din, claiming that he had to repay a loan that he guaranteed years ago. When the judges walked in, Dovid discovered that the head judge, Rabbi Weinberg, was Ephraim's neighbor living in the same condo! Can Dovid demand that Rabbi Weinberg step down from judging this case, claiming that Rabbi Weinberg will show favoritism towards his neighbor?

1. Yes, this is a valid claim by Dovid, and Rabbi Weinberg will have to step off the Beis Din and be replaced by someone else.
2. No, this is not a valid claim, and Rabbi Weinberg can remain on the Beis Din.

Beis Medrash Bnei Torah (BMBT) of Fallsdale was bursting at the seams and the Board of Trustees decided that they needed to hire a fulltime Rabbi. The Rabbi Search Committe made a list of four qualities that they were looking for. According to the S.A., which two (2) of these qualities are the most important?

1. Learned in Torah.
2. A gifted orator - who can speak well and have the kehilla listen to him.
3. Amiable - someone who is friendly and well-liked by the kehilla (a chevra man).
4. Acts properly - like a metsch - following all Torah laws.

Lenny (the "Louse") had a financial claim against Mr. Goldberg, and while Mr. Goldberg wanted to go to the Yorkville Beis Din to settle this, Lenny (the "Louse") refused. Rabbi Cohen suggested to the two of them that they use ZAVLA, and Mr. Goldberg agreed and selected Dayan Chaim Toledano to be "his" judge. But then Lenny (the "louse") announced that he had selected Dayan Pinchas Toledano, the brother of Chaim! As two brothers cannot be on the same Beis Din, what must they do now?

1. Both Rabbis must step down, and both litigants must select new judges.
2. The Dayan selected by the plaintiff (Lenny (the "louse")) can remain, and the defendant must select a new Dayan.
3. The Dayan selected by the defendant (Mr. Goldberg) can remain, and the plaintiff must select a new Dayan.

As Mr. Gross was about to pull into his parking spot, his son Chaim Baruch threw a fit in the car, and Mr. Gross got distracted and crashed through the fence of his neighbor, Shlomo Kagan. Mr. Gross refused to pay for the damage he caused, so Mr. Kagan suggested that they go to the well-known and well-respected Beis Din in Jerusalem to settle the case. Mr. Gross refused, saying that there were plenty of competent Batei Dinim in their local city, and there was no need to travel to Jerusalem to go to this "famous" Beis Din. Can Mr. Kagan force Mr. Gross to go to the Beis Din in Jerusalem if the distance is about 21 miles (35km)?

While Richard Kagan was visiting his brother Shlomo in Israel, he was introduced to Avishai Lewitan, who was looking for a partner in his next real estate project in Jerusalem. The two hit it off; Richard was in for 50% and then left for his home in the USA. But when Avishai saw too much money from the completed project leaving the partnership account and going to Richard's Israeli bank account, he accused Richard of stealing and threatened to sue him in Beis Din. "So come to the USA and we can meet in front of the Yorkville Beis Din" said Richard to Avishai. But Avishai knew that the Beis Din in Jerusalem was far superior, and insisted that they meet in Jerusalem. Who has the upper hand?

1. Richard Kagan, the defendant, can force Avishai Lewitan to come to the Beis Din in the USA.
2. Avishai Lewitan, the plaintiff, can force Richard Kagan to come to the superior Beis Din in Jerusalem.

Shlomo Kagan, who lived in Beit Shemesh, borrowed a large sum of money from his father-in-law Mordechai in Netanya. However, when it came time to pay it back, Shlomo began ghosting him and ignored the requests for payment. Mordechai eventually felt compelled to serve his son-in-law with an order to appear in the Netanya Beis Din, but Shlomo insisted that they appear in front of a Beis Din in Beit Shemesh. Who has the upper hand?

1. Mordechai, the plaintiff, can insist that his son-in-law come to Netanya and appear in front of the Beis Din there.
2. Shlomo, the defendant, can insist that his father-in-law leave Netanya and appear in front of a local Beit Shemesh Beis Din.

Rabbi Toledano heard both sides in the case in front of him, and in his mind the verdict was already clear. Must he do anything before announcing a verdict?

1. Yes. After hearing both parties, a judge must summarize both arguments before rendering a verdict. 
2. No. As long as a majority of the three judges are in agreement, they can just render a verdict. The S.A. does not require a summary - though a judge could offer one if desired.

Fishel (the local indigent Jew), had stepped away from his "cardboard box home" for only a few minutes when Levy came driving by in his fancy car and destroyed his box - and the new iPhone that some kind soul had given him only last week. Fishel sued Levy in the Yorkville Beis Din for $21.37, the cost of a new cardboard box and a simple Tracphone. The Beis Din understood that Levy was at fault, but they also understood that the damaged iPhone was worth closer to $1000 - but to Fishel, a "phone is a phone" and he didn't understand his iPhone's actual worth. Can the Beis Din award Fishel $1041.36 - the replacement price of a new iPhone and a new cardboard box?

At the end of Shacharis, on the morning after Harry Brochstein graciously hosted sheva brochos for Mr. Goldberg's daughter and son-in-law, Mr. Brochstein confronted Mr. Goldberg: "Someone cracked my very expensive Stueben Glass Egg last night, and I think you should pay!" Mr. Goldberg denied responsibility, and as the two of them wanted to get to a quick resolution, they asked Rabbi Goodman to hear their arguments right then and there. While Rabbi Goodman was an expert at Choshen Mishpat, there were no other Rabbis available to sit on a Beis Din, so he asked Mel Hoffman and Arnold Sunenshine - two regular members of his synagogue - to be the other two members of the Beis Din. After hearing the arguments, Rabbi Goodman felt it was obvious that Mr. Goldberg was not obligated to pay anything. However, Mel and Arnold disagreed. How do we determine the final outcome?

1. We follow Rabbi Goodman, as he is an expert at Choshen Mishpat, even though he is not the majority.
2. We follow Mel and Arnold, as they are the majority, even though they are unlearned in the laws of Choshen Mishpat.

Mr. Goldberg lost in his monetary case against Lenny (the "louse") in the Yorkville Beis Din. When Mr. Goldberg went to Florida for the winter, he mentioned the case to Rabbi Goodman, and even showed him the transcript of the case and the final judgement. Rabbi Goodman looked over the papers and was shocked by how much money Mr. Goldberg had to pay, and felt that there was no halachic basis for the Yorkville Beis Din to demand such a large payment. Can Rabbi Goodman tell Mr. Goldberg his opinion of this ruling?

"Respected dayanim, I have evidence that will prove that I do not owe the other party any money. However, I do not have access to this proof today, and I am not sure when I will get it." said Richard Kagan to the judges of the Yorkville Beis Din. With no proof on Richard's side, they ruled in favor of the plaintiff and ordered Richard to pay. HOWEVER, they wrote in the judgement that if the defendant can present his evidence within 30 days, they will reopen the case and judge it based on this new evidence. Unfortunately, Richard couldn't obtain his proof for SIX FULL MONTHS! Can he still force the Beis Din to reopen the case and allow him to present his evidence, even though he missed the 30-day deadline?

Richard Kagan was suing his "former partner" on his Lakeshore Towers project on Lake Tahoe for $1 Million. They both agreed to the La Brea Beis Din in Los Angeles, but during the hearing, Richard realized that the original contract he brought was superseded by another contract they wrote - and he left that in his office. "Your Honors, I have incontrovertible proof for my case, but it is back in New York." After some discussion, the judges gave Richard 30 days to bring the evidence back to their court. They made a "kinyon" in which Richard lifted the hat of one of the judges, and stated that if he did not bring the proof within 30 days then he would abandon the case. Richard found the evidence back in his office, but due to his busy schedule the next time he could travel back to LA would be the 29th day, arriving on the 30th day. His secretary made the reservation, but the evening of the 29th it began to snow, and the airport closed down. The snow was so heavy that it was not able to reopen for another 36 hours, and by that time it was already too late to appear on the 30th day, so he didn't bother going back to the Beis Din. Six months later Richard had other business in LA, and he stopped by the La Brea Beis Din to present his evidence. Given that Richard made a kinyon to bring the evidence within 30 days, and this is not only after 30 days, but five additional months, will the Beis Din accept his evidence?

Reuven and Levy were driving their golf carts at the Kiamesha Village Bungalow Colony, when they both crashed into each other. While neither party was injured, there was damage to both carts, and each one blamed the other for the damage. Since they had no golf cart insurance, they brought their case to the Lake Kiamesha Beis Din. The Beis Din discovered that there was one - and only one - witness to the accident: Rabbi Juravel.  According to Torah law, one witness is not full evidence, and only two witnesses can be counted as full evidence. Can the Beis Din accept Rabbi Juravel's testimony as full evidence and decide the case based on his testimony Only?

1. Yes, but both sides must agree, and they must make a kinyon with the Beis Din that they are accepting testimony from this one Jew as if he were two kosher witnesses.
2. No. Even if they make a kinyon, only testimony from two kosher witnesses can be used by the Beis Din to fully decide a case.

Reuven and Levy were driving their golf carts at the Kiamesha Village Bungalow Colony, when they both crashed into each other. While neither party was injured, there was damage to both carts, and each one blamed the other for the damage. Since they had no golf cart insurance, they brought their case to the Lake Kiamesha Beis Din. The Beis Din discovered that there was one - and only one - witness to the accident: Rebbetzin Juravel. Can the Beis Din accept her testimony as full evidence and decide the case based on her testimony Only?

1. Yes, but both sides must agree, and they must make a kinyon with the Beis Din that they are accepting testimony from this one female Jew as if she were two kosher (male) witnesses.
2. No. Even if they make a kinyon, only testimony from two kosher "male" witnesses can be used by the Beis Din to fully decide a case.

Reuven and Levy were driving their golf carts at the Kiamesha Village Bungalow Colony, when they both crashed into each other. While neither party was injured, there was damage to both carts, and each one blamed the other for the damage. They wanted to bring their case to the Lake Kiamesha Beis Din, but the next available date for a hearing was after the summer season! Rabbi Juravel, the Rabbi of the Bungalow, was also not available. Moshe Cohen's brother Roy was there for the week, and while he was currently an irreligious Jew, he had studied Jewish law when he was younger and said he was capable of judging the case according to Jewish law. If both sides agree to having Roy as the judge and they make a kinyon attesting to this fact, can either side later contest the decision in a proper Beis Din?

1. Yes. Since Roy Cohen is an irreligious Jew, making a kinyon to have him act as a judge is irrelevant, and either side can contest the decision in the future.
2. No. Because they made a kinyon, both sides agree that Roy Cohen is acting as if he were a proper Beis Din of three religious Jews, and therefore the decison cannot be contested on these grounds.

Shlomo Kagan rented a commercial pressure washer to clean all the surfaces in his backyard. But just as he started up the motor, his neighbor Mr. Gross saw the machine and asked if he could borrow it for a few minutes. Shlomo decided to allow him to use it, but as soon as the machine was on the other side of the wall, Mr. Gross's son had a fit, and destroyed the machine! Shlomo took the broken machine back to office and was charged $1000 for the machine plus another $100 for the daily rental. When Mr. Gross refused to pay him back the $1000+$100, they both agreed to have Rabbi Rubin judge their case. After hearing both sides, Rabbi Rubin sent his ruling via email that "Mr. Gross must pay $1000 to Mr. Kagan." Mr. Gross paid the $1000, but Mr. Kagan said, "What about the $100 rental fee?!" How can they determine if Mr. Gross must pay the $100 rental fee?

1. They can ask Rabbi Rubin to clarify if his judgment was only for $1000, or if it was also supposed to include another $100 for the rental fee.
2. They cannot ask Rabbi Rubin, and instead must find another Rabbi or Beis Din to settle the dispute over the $100.

Aventura Adventures (AA) took Boca Bivouacs (BB) to the Boca Beis Din for $1,000,000 over a transaction that happened one month ago. While BB admitted that it did owe $1 Million , it also claimed that AA owed it $1 Million  from a transaction that happened a year ago, and therefore there is no money owed to it. The judges demand to see proof of this, but BB said that they would need 90 days to produce this proof. Before the judges could say anything, AA objected, stating that halacha only grants BB 30 days to provide proof. Since they can’t provide proof within this time frame, the judges should rule in their favor now, obligating BB to pay AA immediately. Then if and when BB obtains their proof, they can file another claim in Beis Din to demand their $1 Million they are owed. BB objected to this, stating this will cause their company irreparable damage: When people hear BB lost in Beis Din for such a large amount of money, they will assume that BB is going bankrupt and will be hesitant to do business with them. What should the Beis Din do regarding this 30 day rule?

1. The Beis Din will award $1 Million to AA now, and if BB gets their proof, they can open a new case for $1 Million. The Beis Din does not need to wait more than 30 days before reaching their judgment.
2. The Beis Din can waive the 30 day rule, and must do so in a case where a party faces very large losses and/or bankruptcy due to this rule. Therefore, all parties will have to wait 90 days for the proof to be brought.

After Mr. Goldberg lost his case against Lenny (the “Louse”) in the Yorkville Beis Din, he showed the verdict to Rabbi Goodman in Boca. Rabbi Goodman was shocked at the number of mistakes the Beis Din made. Rabbi Goodman called the Yorkville Beis Din and shared with them his thoughts. The judges on the Beis Din thought about it and admitted their mistake. The Beis Din called Lenny (the “Louse”) and told him to return the funds that Mr. Goldberg had given him. “Nothing doing! I just spoke with Rabbi Cohen, and he told me that there is an opinion that says I can keep the money!”

Mr. Goldberg then demanded that the Yorkville Beis Din compensate him for the money he just lost due to their error, but they responded, “While we apologize for the mistake, you cannot claim anything against us because of the arbitration agreement you signed when you opened the case. This agreement states that you will abide by our ruling "ben ledin, ben letaut" (whether we judge properly or mistakenly).” Mr. Goldberg was livid, as he had no idea that this “sneaky” clause was in the arbitration agreement. He decided to sue the entire Yorkville Beis Din in the Brooklyn Gardens Beis Din for his money, claiming they knew they judged his case incorrectly, and that he did not know about the clause when he signed the agreement. How will the BGBD rule?

1. They will rule that the Yorkville Beis Din must pay Mr. Goldberg due to their mistake.
2. They will rule that Mr. Goldberg cannot collect since he willingly signed the arbitration agreement with this "ben ledin, ben letaut" clause.

According to the P.T., when there is a disagreement between the Shach and the Sma, which opinion do we follow?

1. The Shac"h
2. The Sm"a

Mr. Goldberg was very upset that he lost his case in the Yorkville Beis Din against Lenny (the "Louse"), and when he came to Boca for the winter he discussed it with Rabbi Goodman, who immediately saw that all three judges made a mistake in their judgment, as they seemed to misunderstand what the S.A. ruled in a case such as Mr. Goldberg's! Mr. Goldberg contacted the Beis Din, and while they agreed that they made a mistake, Lenny (the "Louse") had already skipped town with the money that Mr. Goldberg had given him as per the ruling of the Beis Din. Can Mr. Goldberg sue the Yorkville Beis Din and demand that they compensate him for the money he lost due to their obviously incorrect ruling?

Reuven and Levy were driving their golf carts at the Kiamesha Village Bungalow Colony, when they both crashed into each other. While neither party was injured, there was damage to both carts, and each one blamed the other for the damage. They wanted to bring their case to the Lake Kiamesha Beis Din, but the next available date for a hearing was after the summer season! Levy then convinced Reuven to go to the Woodbourne Beis Din, where they would get a quick hearing. They both signed an arbitration agreement, and after the hearing, the judges decided in Levy's favor. Reuven was very upset, and after a little research, he discovered that while the judges in this Beis Din were learned men, none of them had any type of semicha! "This Beis Din is invalid! This decision is invalid!” claimed Reuven to Levy, “None of the judges have semicha, so I am not paying!” Levy took out the arbitration agreement and showed Reuven two clauses: 1) Both sides agree to accept the decision of this Beis Din – bein ledin, bein letaut” and 2) A Kinyon was performed. Eventually the case went before the Lake Kiamesha Beis Din, where both Levy and Reuven admitted that they never actually made the Kinyon. Will the new Beis Din review the case?

Levy didn’t have time to go out for lunch, so he ordered a corned beef on rye from Mr. Broad Street, but after it arrived, his coworker Yoely saw the sandwich in the “Mr. Broad Street” wrapper, and yelled out “OY VA VOY! TREIF!” “WHAT?” demanded Levy. “They lost their hechsher last week, so the sandwich is not kosher!” Levy threw out the sandwich and quickly ordered a Moroccan Lamb Burger from The Wall Street Grill. But as he was going home, he happened to pass by Mr. Broad Street and saw they proudly displayed a new kosher certificate in the window! Levy confronted Yoely the next day, and Yoely responded, “The Rebbe doesn’t hold of this new hechsher, and he considers anything made there to be treif!” However, Levy (and many other people) did hold of this new – albeit non “chasidish” – hechsher! Can Levy bring Yoely to Beis Din to demand repayment for the lost sandwich?

Elky knew that the Yorkville Beis Din wouldn't give her enough money in her claim against her future "EX" husband Hertzl, so she sued him in the Yorkville Family Court. What does the S.A. call a person such as Elky that takes another Jew to Civil Court?

1. Average (Beinonis)
2. A Sinner (Choteh)
3. A Transgressor (Avarion)
4. A Wicked Person (Rasha)

Moshe Khodedadian woke up to find that his Lexus ES350 was gone! He looked at his security camera footage and saw that it was stolen by none other than Lenny (the "Louse"). While Moshe unfortunately had left his keys in the car, which is how Lenny was able to drive away, he fortunately had an AirTag on his fob, and was able to track his car to a locked garage on Susquehanna Ave. Please select all the valid options for Moshe at this time:

1. Go to the Nassau County District Court and file a lawsuit, since the video evidence clearly shows it was Lenny (the "Louse") who stole the car.
2. Break into the garage on Susquehanna Ave and retrieve the car.

Richard Kagan and Avishai Lewitan both invested $5 million in a new real estate project in Tel-Aviv.  Avishai's lawyers drew up a contract, which included the standard legal language that all disputes would be settled in the Tel-Aviv District Court - a civil court. Unfortunately, just as the project was finishing construction, Richard and Avishai got into a financial dispute. Are they permitted to settle this dispute in the Tel-Aviv District Court, as both of them signed on the contract that this would be the only place for dispute resolution?

"That's all the cheese? But I ordered EXTRA cheese!" demanded Lenny (the "Louse"). But Moishe wasn't listening, as he knew that Lenny always complained, even when he gave him pizza with lots of extra cheese! "May God strike you down right now!" yelled out Lenny, scaring the Silverman boys who were waiting behind Lenny. What is the status of this English-language curse?

1. It is crude and inappropriate for a Jew to say these words, but nothing further.
2. It is a Rabbinical prohibition to say this curse.
3. It is a Biblical prohibition to say this curse.

"Didn't you get my letter I sent two months ago?" asked Grandpa Shmuel while visiting his grandson Yitzchak Tzvi. "Grandpa, you already have an iPhone - let me show you how to send a message on WhatsApp." After the instructions, Grandpa Shmuel decided to write a text to his son Shlomo: "Thank God your son showed me how to send a message on this thing." How should he spell the name of God while writing this electronic message?

1. With a dash: G-d.
2. With an "o": God.
3. It doesn't matter in this case and either spelling is acceptable.

Mrs. Khodedadian had just sat down in her Tesla after shopping at Great Neck Glatt. She saw a car in her rearview mirror pull out of the CVS at high speed and hit JoJo Shehebar's Lexus 460, which was parked directly behind her. This severely scratched and dented all the the side panels on the Lexus. But instead of stopping, the car just sped up Middleneck Road! Mrs. Khodedadian didn't get the license of the car, but she knew her Sentry Mode cameras got it. According to the S.A., what is her responsibility to give JoJo Shehebar information about the damage to his car?

1. She has no obligation at all, and would not even get a mitzvah for informing him.
2. She has no obligation, but she would get a mitzvah for informing him.
3. She is obligated to provide any and all information she has to him.

All 127 residents of Richard Kagan’s “Madison View” apartment sued him and his management company for financial impropriety. To prove their point, the residents subpoenaed Neil Silverman, the Jewish accountant for the management company, to testify in civil court against his boss, Richard Kagan. Because the head of the resident’s committee was the star of the wildly popular Netflix series Dept. Z, this lawsuit made all the news stations, and when he was interviewed on live TV, this man told the “world” that this religious Jew would testify and prove their case. Neil Silverman knew that if this case was held in a Beis Din, the most that the residents could claim would be a tenth of what they might win in civil court! According to the S.A., is Neil Silverman permitted to testify against fellow Jew Richard Kagan in this case?

All 127 residents of Richard Kagan’s “Madison View” apartment sued him and his management company for financial impropriety. To prove their point, the residents subpoenaed Neil Silverman, the Jewish accountant for the management company, to testify in civil court against his boss, Richard Kagan. While the members of the residents’ committee knew about the Jew, Neil Silverman, no one else did, as this was just another case in a civil court filled will tenants suing landlords. However, Neil Silverman knew that if this case was held in a Beis Din and he was asked to testify as a single witness, the most that the residents could claim would be a tenth of what they might win in civil court! According to the A.H., is Neil Silverman permitted to testify against fellow Jew Richard Kagan in the Yorkville Civil Court, located in the USA?

All 127 residents of Richard Kagan’s “Madison View” apartment sued him and his management company for financial impropriety, and subpoenaed Neil Silverman, the Jewish accountant for the management company, to testify in civil court against Richard Kagan. As no one besides the litigants knew about this case, Neil didn't want to testify, and therefore ignored the subpoena. When he didn't show up at the trial at the Yorkville Civil Court, the residents' committee asked the judge to force Neil to appear. The judge rescheduled the hearing and then had the bailiff inform Neil that if he didn't appear at this next hearing he would be held in contempt of court and jailed. According to the A.H., must Neil give up his freedom and sit in jail, and not testify against a fellow Jew in civil court?

1. Yes. As this involved a negative commandment to not testify against his fellow Jew in civil court, Neil must give up everything, including his freedom, and sit in jail.
2. No. Neil is not required to give up his freedom, and is permitted to testify truthfully in this case.

The S.A. requires two witnesses who give testimony, and to do so only in person. A written affidavit, for example, would not suffice. Yet, Beis Din will accept documents such as loan contracts and wills, which have the signatures of two kosher Jews at the bottom, and will not require these two Jews to appear in the Beis Din and testify as to the validity of the contract. Why are the two witnesses who signed on these documents not required to appear in Beis Din?

1. The Torah never obligated witnesses of financial transactions to appear in court.
2. The Rabbis decided to be lenient with these types of financial documents.
3. Signatures are equivalent to actual witnesses in court.

Chazan Seymour Schwartzman (emeritus) was falling on hard times (retirement was difficult for him) and so he approached Mr. Goldberg to borrow $1500 from him. When he didn't pay it back at the agreed-upon time, Mr. Goldberg sued him in the Yorkville Beis Din. "Do you have any witnesses?" asked Rabbi Toledano, to which Mr. Goldberg presented 5 witnesses. As the judges interviewed each witness, they were surprised by the variety of responses:

1. Witness 1 saw a loan take place on Sunday for $100
2. Witness 2 saw a loan take place on Monday for $200
3. Witness 3 saw a loan take place on Tuesday for $300
4. Witness 4 saw a loan take place on Wednesday for $400
5. Witness 5 saw a loan take place on Thursday for $500

According to the S.A., what is the amount that the Beis Din will force Chazan Schwartzman (Emeritus) to pay Mr. Goldberg today?

1. $200
2. $700
3. $967
4. $1500

Jo Jo Shehabar loaned $2000 to his mechutan Isaac Dwek, but when it came time to pay back, Isaac denied ever having received a loan. Jo Jo summoned Isaac to the Great Neck Beis Din and brought with him 2 witnesses. The first witness stated that he saw Jo Jo lend $2000 to Mr. Dwek on Sunday, and the second witness stated that he saw Jo Jo lend $2000 to Mr. Dwek on Monday. How will the Beis Din rule in this case?

1. Since the two witnesses contradict each other regarding the date of the loan, they are not admissible and no money will be awarded to Jo Jo.
2. Since the two witnesses do agree on the amount loaned, the Beis Din will award Jo Jo $2000.
3. Since the witnesses might be used to claim two loans totalling $4000, but the claim is only for $2000, the Beis Din will assume there is some truth to the matter and award $1000.

After Shacharis at the Great Neck Sefardi Synagogue, Isaac Dwek asked his mechutan Jo Jo Shehabar to loan him $2000, and Jo Jo immediately obliged and gave him $2000 cash for 30 days. Unbeknownst to Jo Jo and Isaac, Zack Mizrachi was in the front of the synagogue and witnessed the entire proceedings, and Evan Elyahou was in the back row and also witnessed the loan – and neither witness knew that the other witness had seen everything. Thirty days later, Isaac claimed that he never took out a loan. After Shacharis, Jo Jo asked if anyone noticed this loan, and Zack and Evan said they did. Can these two men join together as kosher witnesses to this loan in a Beis Din?

Jo Jo Shehebar couldn't get his mechutan Isaac Dwek to repay the $2000 he loaned him, so he took him to the Great Neck Beis Din. Before the hearing, Jo Jo informed the Beis Din that he had two witnesses to the loan, but due to their busy schedules, the first witness could only show up on Monday afternoon, and the second witness could only show up on Tuesday morning. Will the Beis Din accept the testimony from these two witnesses, as the strength of "Shnei Eidem", if they testify separately on two different days?

Jo Jo Shehebar tried to get his mechutan Isaac Dwek to repay the $2000 he loaned him, but Isaac denied ever having taken a loan. Jo Jo took him to the Great Neck Beis Din, and during the hearing Evan Elyahou and Zack Mizrachi showed up and told the judges that they witnessed the loan. Given this testimony, the judges ruled in favor of Jo Jo, and Isaac paid him the $2000 he claimed. Some time later Josh Ebrani presented himself to the Beis Din and admited that he was a good friend of Jo Jo, and didn't want him to lose out, so he hired these two witnesses to give false testimony to the Beis Din to force Isaac to pay the $2000 to his friend. Will the Beis Din now compel Josh Ebrani to pay Isaac Dwek $2000, since he caused him this loss of money?

Jo Jo Shehebar summoned his mechutan, Isaac Dwek, to the Great Neck Beis Din over an unpaid loan. To support his claim, he brought in Josh Ebrani as a witness to the transaction. “But the two of them are best friends!” Isaac protested to the Beis Din. Can Isaac disqualify Josh’s testimony on the grounds that, as Jo Jo’s close friend, his testimony might be biased?

Yitzchak Tzvi asked his friend Avidan to be one of the witnesses at his wedding. He had some ideas about a second witness, which he discussed with the Rosh Yeshiva to ensure that they would be kosher witnesses together. Please select all the men below who would be kosher as a second witness:

1. The man is related to Avidan, the first witness.
2. The man is related to Yitzchak Tzvi, the groom.
3. The man is related to Chana, the bride.
4. The man is related to the Rosh Yeshiva, who is the Mesader Kedushin.

Yitzchak Tzvi asked Rabbi Michaels to be the first witness at his wedding. When he discussed a possibility for a second witness with the Rosh Yeshiva, the Rosh Yeshiva told him that Rabbi Michaels' wife and the wife of the potential second witness were first cousins. Is this second witness valid, even though he is only related to the first witness through marriage?

1. Yes.
2. Yes, but this is not preferred.
3. No.

Yitzchak Tzvi asked Rabbi Michaels to be the first witness at his wedding. When he discussed a possibility for a second witness with the Rosh Yeshiva, the Rosh Yeshiva told him that Rabbi Michaels' was a step brother with this other witness (Rabbi Michael's father had married the mother of this second potential witness). Is this second witness valid, even though he is only related to the first witness through the marriage of the parents?

1. Yes.
2. Yes, but this is not preferred.
3. No.

Yitzchak Tzvi asked Rabbi Michaels to be the first witness at his wedding. When he discussed a possibility for a second witness with the Rosh Yeshiva, the Rosh Yeshiva told him that Rabbi Michaels' sister had married the second potential witness, but this sister had died shortly before Yitzchak Tzvi entered the Yeshiva. Is this second witness valid, as he is related to the first witness through his deceased wife?

1. Yes.
2. Yes, but this is not preferred.
3. No.

Richard Kagan was in a bind. His former partner on the Lakeshore Towers project on Lake Tahoe was suing him for $1 million, and the case hinged on the testimony of their former accountant, Neil Silverman. Seeking to block Neil's testimony, Richard devised a scheme: "Neil, you're a single guy, and my daughter is looking for someone responsible to marry. I not only think the two of you will hit it off, but I am willing to put my money where my mouth is, and back the two of you financially." Neil initially declined, but he actually hit it off with Richard's daughter, and after creating a proper financial contract with his soon-to-be father-in-law, Neil married her. The hearing for the Lakeshore Towers in the LaBrea Beis Din took place a few days after the last Sheva Brochos, and Richard objected to Neil's testimony, claiming that as his son-in-law, Neil was now disqualified from serving as a witness against him. Will the Beis Din permit this testimony, for without it, there is no case against Richard?

1. Yes. Since Neil witnessed the events prior to becoming related, his testimony can be permitted, and Richard’s scheme can be circumvented.
2. No. Neil is now a disqualified witness due to the familial relationship, and the Beis Din must reject his testimony regardless of the motive behind the marriage.

As Mr. Goldberg entered The Boca Shul (TBS) for Shacharis with a cast on his right arm, Rabbi Goodman asked with concern, “Mr. Goldberg, what happened to your arm?” Initially hesitant, Mr. Goldberg eventually disclosed that during a round of golf, Marty Krauser sliced the ball into the water on the 11th hole. Mr. Goldberg laughed and in a fit of frustration, Marty deliberately struck him with his club. However, when Rabbi Goodman confronted Marty about the incident, he adamantly denied any physical contact. With no witnesses present, does Rabbi Goodman have any recourse?

1. No. Without witnesses, it is just one word against the other.
2. Yes. The Rabbi can decide to believe Mr. Goldberg and deny Marty entry into TBS.

Tom Goldberger thought that he was just going to be another guest at Mel Hoffman's fancy wedding at The Boca Gateways Hotel, but before the wedding, Mel pulled Tom aside and asked him to be a witness for the Kiddushin part of the wedding ceremony (when the ring is put on the bride's finger). "I don't know, Mel" said Tom, as he stroked his freshly shaven face. Tom was ostensibly religious, but he also shaved with a razor every day, and while he understood that this was forbidden, he still did it. How should Tom respond to this honor?

1. Since Tom otherwise keeps all the commandments, and no one knows that he shaves with a forbidden razor and not a permissible electric shaver, he can accept the honor and be a witness at the wedding.
2. Since Tom shaves with a forbidden razor, he would not be considered a kosher witness, and as such he should refuse the honor to be a witness.

Before Mel Hoffman's wedding ceremony began, Rabbi Goodman was informally shmoozing with Tom Goldberger, one of the witnesses. During the conversation, the Rabbi learned that Tom would normally get his hair cut at Mario's Barber shop - right next to the Grove Kosher Supermarket - and that while Mario would primarily use an electric razor and scissors, he would finish up with a single-blade razor to clean up Tom's beard. "You do know that using a razor to cut a beard is forbidden by the Torah?" asked Rabbi Goodman. "I know. But ALL the men from The Boca Shul go to Mario, and he only uses a blade to clean the edges!" replied Tom. Can Tom be a witness at Mel's wedding? Please match the posek (A.H. and P.T.) with the psak (Yes or No).

Yitzchak Tzvi Kagan was scheduled to get married around sunset. Rabbi Montrose and his best friend Avidan were ready to act as his witnesses and sign the kesuva. Of these two typical scenarios, which one is worse?

1. Before sunset and before the wedding began, Rabbi Montrose and Avidan signed on the kesuva, even though the actual marriage won't take place until the next day, after sunset, which is when the kesuva is dated.
2. After sunset and after the wedding finished, Rabbi Montrose and Avidan signed on the kesuva, which was dated before sunset, but due to a delay the wedding only took place after sunset. 

Tom Goldberger urgently needed $100,000 to avoid foreclosure on his condo on Sawgrass Circle, Boca. He turned to Chaim Sachs (of "Sachs Jewelers"), who was eager to help a fellow Jew in distress. However, Chaim required the loan to be for 12 months at 10% annual interest, with two witnesses and one guarantor. Despite the absence of a heter iska, those involved felt compassion and wanted to assist. Based on the halachic implications of this interest-bearing loan, please identify which of the individuals listed below were prohibited from participating in the transaction.

1. Chaim (the lender)
2. The guarantor
3. The two witnesses

Eddie Cohen, manager of The Grove Kosher Market in Boca, hired three Jewish bakers to prepare all the breads, cookies, and cakes for the store’s new in-house bakery. However, whenever he would check up on his workers, he noticed they were constantly fressing—sampling mini blueberry pies, black and white cookies, and even the famous Grove Pretzel Rolls. Given that Eddie pays them a proper salary, does he have the halachic right to forbid them from eating any of the baked goods?

1. Yes. Eddie can forbid these men from eating.
2. No, but Eddie does have the right to restrict which baked goods can be eaten (e.g. damaged or imperfect products), or when the workers can eat (on break, but not while on the job).
3. No. Eddie is not permitted to put any restrictions on what these men consume during their work hours.

Each morning, Isaac Dwek’s wife drove him to the train station—but not before stopping at Bagel Mentch, where he picked up a coffee and a pastry (sometimes a muffin, a black and white cookie, or even a giant rugelach). After being dropped off, Isaac would eat and drink as he walked to the platform, usually finishing before the train arrived. The A.H. describes public eating as a degrading habit that can disqualify someone from serving as a kosher witness. Given that Isaac regularly eats pastries and drinks coffee in public, does this behavior fall under that category, potentially rendering him a non-kosher witness?

As Rabbi Goodman was interrogating Tom Goldberger and Arnold Sunenshine—both potential witnesses for Mel Hoffman's elegant wedding—he realized that Tom had a "cheeseburger problem". "Tom, you understand that a Jew has to keep kosher and can't eat at McDonald's" stated Rabbi Goodman. "I know. I've tried to stop, but the cheeseburgers are so delicious!" After some more discussion, Tom exclaimed, "Rabbi, I have decided to repent fully for my misdeeds. No more cheeseburgers for me!" Is Tom's declaration of teshuva shelayma for this sin sufficient for him to be a kosher witness? 

1. Yes. We believe his statement and Tom is now considered a kosher witness.
2. No. We must see how Tom behaves in the future and only then judge his repentence as being genuine.

Richard Kagan had a problem. His former partner on the Lakeshore Towers project at Lake Tahoe was suing him for $1 million. Richard could prove he wasn’t liable through the testimony of his former accountant, Neil Silverman. However, Neil had not only left this job, but he had left the country entirely. Neil made Aliyah to Israel and had no interest in paying for a flight to appear before the LaBrea Beis Din on Richard’s behalf. Although the S.A. prohibits paying a witness for testimony, would Richard be permitted to cover Neil’s travel and related expenses in order to bring him to Beis Din to testify?

Mel Hoffman was shocked that his mother had given nearly all her possessions to his sister Dina in her halachic will. "I understand your disappointment, Mel, but mother wanted it this way." Mel looked at the will and saw it was witnessed by Morty Howard and Alan Greene, two friends of their late father. After making a few calls, he told his sister, "You know that the will is invalid because Mr. Howard and Mr. Greene did not publicly keep Shabbos - and I even have two witnesses to prove that!" Dina pushed back. “Mel, they were both religious men. If they were alive today, they would certainly be able to defend their status in Beis Din.” When Mel and Dina present their arguments in the Boca Beis Din, how would it rule?

1. The Beis Din will side with Mel and invalidate the will. Mel has living witnesses who testify that the original witnesses were not Shabbos observant in public and, therefore, the original witnesses are invalidated. The fact that Morty and Alan are deceased and cannot defend themselves does not affect the ruling.
2. The Beis Din will side with Dina and uphold the will. Had the original witnesses been alive, they would have been able to defend their religious status before Beis Din.

When Rabbi Goodman finished speaking with Tom Goldberger and Arnold Sunenshine, the designated witnesses for Mel Hoffman's wedding, Harry Brochstein came over and whispered into the Rabbi's ear. "Rabbi, you need to know that I have gone to the Town Mall and have seen Tom eating lobster a few times, and once he was eating oysters! There was no doubt, Rabbi, because he sat right next to the window, which was next to the mall's entranceway." Rabbi Goodman thanked Harry for this information and then returned to Tom and broached the subject. "Tom, do you ever eat non-kosher food?" Tom vehemently denied it. "Only kosher, Rabbi!" Can Tom still be a witness for Mel's wedding?

1. Yes. The testimony of just one witness (Mr. Brochstein) cannot invalidate an otherwise kosher witness (Tom Goldberger).
2. No. Since this one witness (Mr. Brochstein) is kosher, his testimony that Tom eats non-kosher food is accepted and thereby invalidates Tom as a witness to the wedding.

The Hebrew Day School of Great Neck was looking for a new third grade Rebbe, but they only managed to get two applicants, Mr. Adler and Mr. Baum. But as the board of trustees was reviewing these candidates, Mr. Wold, a board member, said, "These candidates can't be Rebbes in our school, because the three of us went out to lunch, and trust me, the lobster we all ate was not kosher!" The other members of the board investigated, and Mr. Adler denied this, while Mr. Baum admitted that they all ate lobster. Since these men are otherwise qualified for the job and there are no other candidates, which one should get the job?

1. Mr. Adler (who denied eating lobster).
2. Mr. Baum (who admitted eating lobster).

Tom Goldberger felt genuinely remorseful after being disqualified as a witness at Mel Hoffman’s wedding. He especially wanted to repent for the sin of ribis that he charged Moshe Glick, as well as the dozens of other people to whom he had lent money improperly. He approached Rabbi Goodman seeking guidance on how to complete his teshuvah. Please select which of the following actions might Rabbi Goodman instruct him to take:

1. Return all interest he collected to the rightful owners.
2. If he cannot identify the owners, use the money for a Jewish communal need.
3. In addition to refraining from lending to Jews with interest, he should not even lend to non‑Jews with interest.

Tom Goldberger, who gambles for a living, was stunned to learn that he was, therefore, disqualified as a kosher witness. For years he had been playing poker at several legal casinos near Boca, as well as in the living rooms of many Jewish friends and acquaintances, earning enough money to support his family. After discussing the matter with Rabbi Goodman, who confirmed the halachic concerns, Tom reluctantly decided to repent and committed to stop gambling for money. “But Rabbi,” he asked, “I really enjoy playing cards with the guys. If we don’t play for money, can I still join them?” How will Rabbi Goodman respond?

Fifi had been missing for just over three years, and Mr. Feldenkranz had nearly given up hope of finding his dog. But one afternoon in Central Park, he heard a familiar bark behind him. He turned around - and there was Fifi on a leash, with Lenny (the “louse”) holding the other end. “FIFI!” Mr. Feldenkranz cried out in joy. “What are you talking about? This is my dog, Gigi!” Lenny shot back. Mr. Feldenkranz quickly snapped a photo, summoned Lenny to the Yorkville Beis Din, and began searching for witnesses. But none of his friends or neighbors could positively identify the dog as Fifi - except for Mrs. Rosenberg and Mrs. Arons, who both recognized the dog and also remembered seeing an unidentified man take her over three years ago while Mr. Feldenkranz was out. Will the Beis Din fully accept the testimony of these two women?

Annie Silver met Josh Feldman while they were students at the City University, and shortly after graduation they decided to get married. Their elegant wedding at The Plaza Hotel was officiated by Rabbi Milton Steinberg, chief Rabbi of the Park Avenue Synagogue, a Conservative congregation. As was the Rabbi's custom, he made himself one of the witnesses, and the other witness was the groom's uncle, Michael Feldman. Among the guests were many of their college friends, including two of Josh’s ΣΑΜ fraternity brothers who had since become religiously observant. Unfortunately, the marriage was short‑lived. After a year, Josh and Annie went to the New York County Courthouse and obtained a civil divorce, however, neither Josh nor Annie even thought about a get. Four months later, Annie bumped into Arthur, an acquaintance from her days at City U. They developed a relationship and eventually married. Annie soon became pregnant and gave birth to a baby boy. What is the halachic status of this child?

1. He is a mamzer.
2. He is a kosher Jew.

Moshe, the owner of Moshe’s Pizza, was so distraught about paying for his daughter’s wedding that he kept dropping pizzas on the floor. His employee, Rachamim, suggested he approach “Ruby” Kashnow, a well‑known local lender.

Ruby evaluated the situation and agreed to lend Moshe the tens of thousands of dollars he needed — on the condition that Moshe repay within six months, and if he failed to do so, Ruby would be entitled to sell Moshe’s store to recover the funds. Rachamim witnessed the entire transaction.

Six months passed, and Moshe was unable to repay the loan. Ruby brought the case to the Yorkville Beis Din, stating that he wished to close and sell the store to collect the debt. He summoned Rachamim to testify, as Rachamim was the only witness to the loan.

But Rachamim refused, telling the judges that he was nogea b’davar: as an employee of Moshe’s Pizza, if he were to testify that the loan did not occur, the store would remain open and he would keep his job.

One of the judges then took Rachamim aside privately and asked him, “If you were permitted to testify, what would you say?” Rachamim answered, “That I saw the loan take place.”

Should the Yorkville Beis Din allow Rachamim to testify?

1. No. He is biased to testify that the loan did not take place, since his job depends on the store staying open.
2. Yes. Since the testimony he would give is against his own interest, it may be accepted.

Hudy, Rafi, and Josh didn’t like what the yeshiva was serving for lunch, so they went to Moshe’s Pizza and each ordered a slice with lots of extra cheese. When it came time to pay, all three realized they had no cash or credit with them.

“You boys look trustworthy,” Moshe said. “Each of you just bring me $5 tomorrow for your slice.” He wrote each boy’s name — Hudy, Rafi, and Josh — on one piece of paper that read, “I owe Moshe $5 for a slice of pizza,” and had each boy sign the paper next to his name.

The following week, the boys returned to the store. Moshe asked them to pay for last week’s slices.

“But we paid already — don’t you remember?” they insisted.

Moshe didn’t remember, and he still had the signed IOU. Unsure what to do, he brought the matter to Rabbi Cohen. The boys, however, were so adamant that they had paid that they began testifying for one another in front of the Rabbi:

• Rafi and Josh both testified that they saw Hudy pay his $5.
• Rafi and Hudy both testified that Josh paid.
• Josh and Hudy both testified that Rafi paid.

Each boy now had two kosher (male, over 13) witnesses claiming he already paid. Can Rabbi Cohen accept their testimony?

1. Yes. Even though the boys are friends and ate together, two of them can testify on behalf of the third.
2. No. Since the boys ate together and are considered one group, two of them cannot break out of that group to testify for the third.

Shimmy bought a used laptop from the East Side Pawn Shop. Although he tested it in the store, he discovered once he got home that the battery lasted only a few minutes. When he opened the battery compartment to replace it, he found a sticker inside stating that the laptop was the property of “Beryl Feldshuh”, along with contact information.

Shimmy called Beryl, who told him that his laptop had been stolen a few weeks earlier and must have been sold to the pawn shop — and he wants it back! What must Shimmy do?

1. Shimmy must return the laptop to Beryl without charge, and then go back to the pawn shop to fight for a refund.
2. Shimmy must return the laptop to Beryl, but Beryl must reimburse Shimmy the full amount he paid at the pawn shop.
3. Shimmy does not need to return the laptop to Beryl and should tell Beryl to deal directly with the pawn shop owner.

While Rabbi Goodman was away in Israel for the summer, the Boca Shul’s building committee decided to surprise him with a “Shul Improvement Campaign.” It was announced on Friday night with a goal of raising $10,000 and completing the project before the Rabbi’s return.

The money came in quickly — many members were eager to donate. But when it came time to actually spend the funds, a dispute broke out about what had been announced. No one could agree on the original plan, so the money was set aside until Rabbi Goodman returned.

When he was informed of the situation, Rabbi Goodman asked for witnesses who could testify to what the building committee had announced. Most donors didn’t care how the money was used, but:

• Two witnesses testified that the funds were designated for building a new bima.
• Four witnesses testified that the funds were designated for purchasing a modern chandelier to hang over the bima.

What will Rabbi Goodman decide?

1. He will treat the two witnesses and the four witnesses as halachically equal, causing their testimony to cancel out. Since neither side outweighs the other in halacha, he will disregard the testimony and use another method — such as polling the donors — to determine how to use the funds.
2. He will use the money for the chandelier, since four witnesses outweigh two witnesses.

According to Torah law, women are permitted to serve as a shochet and may perform shechita on both animals and poultry. However, historical records show that in Ashkenazi communities, women were not practicing shechita 500 years ago. What if a woman today wanted to learn the halachot of shechita so that she could slaughter her own chicken? Even though the practice fell out of use in Ashkenazi communities long ago, can the original halachic allowance be reinstated today?

Jo Jo Shehebar tried to get his mechutan, Isaac Dwek, to repay the $2,000 he had loaned him, but Isaac denied ever receiving a loan. Jo Jo brought the case to the Great Neck Beis Din. During the hearing, Evan Elyahou and Zack Mizrachi testified that they had witnessed the loan take place. The dayanim then retired to their chambers to deliberate for a few minutes and returned ready to issue a verdict. However, moments before Chief Dayan Ben Chaim announced the decision, Evan and Zack suddenly stood up and said, “We apologize, but we lied in our testimony. We were not present at any loan—if it even happened. Please do not reach the wrong judgment because of us!” Given this new development, how will the Beis Din rule?

1. The Beis Din will dismiss the case and will not require Mr. Dwek to pay Mr. Shehebar anything.
2. The Beis Din will rule that Mr. Dwek must pay Mr. Shehebar $2,000, based on the witnesses’ original testimony.
3. The Beis Din will rule that the two witnesses must pay Mr. Shehebar $2,000.

During their luncheon meeting at The Wall Street Grill, Elisha presented his pitch to Levi: he was seeking a $250,000 loan to launch his bicycle shop. Levi listened, agreed to the loan, and added that he would require 5% interest. “Go hire a lawyer to draft the loan agreement,” Levi instructed. “Since we’re both Jewish, have him prepare a proper heter iska as well. When everything is ready, schedule an appointment with my secretary.”

Elisha followed the instructions, paid $500 to have the documents prepared, and called the following week. “I’m sorry,” the secretary told him, “but Levi asked me to inform you that he no longer wishes to proceed with the loan.”

Elisha brought the matter before the Yorkville Beis Din. He explained that he had incurred $500 in legal expenses at Levi’s direction. Levi acknowledged that he had instructed Elisha to have the loan agreement and heter iska drafted, and admitted that he had initially intended to lend the money but argued that he was under no legal obligation to finalize the loan. How will the Beis Din rule?

1. Levi will be obligated to lend the full $250,000 under the original terms.
2. Levi will not be obligated to lend the $250,000, but he will be required to reimburse Elisha for the $500 spent on preparing the documents.
3. Levi will not be obligated to lend the $250,000, nor will he be required to compensate Elisha for any expenses.

During their luncheon meeting at The Wall Street Grill, Elisha presented his pitch to Levi: he was seeking a $250,000 loan to launch his bicycle shop. Levi listened, agreed to the loan, and added that he would require 5% interest. “Go hire a lawyer to draft the loan agreement,” Levi instructed. “Since we’re both Jewish, have him prepare a proper heter iska as well. When everything is ready, schedule an appointment with my secretary.” Who must pay the lawyer's fee (estimated to be at least $400) for drafting the loan document and the heter iska?

1. Levi, the lender
2. Elisha, the borrrower
3. The lender and the borrower split the costs 50-50.

At the annual Gala Melaveh Malkah at Congregation Shaarei Shamayim, Levi was in a good mood. Seeing Elisha at the table next to him, he publicly declared in a loud voice, “Elisha, I am mochel the $250,000 loan you owe me!”

Elisha’s first payment was due two days later. When that day passed without payment, Levi summoned Elisha to the Yorkville Beis Din to demand repayment. When questioned about his public statement at the Melaveh Malkah, Levi admitted it, but claimed he “didn’t mean it.”

How will Beis Din rule?

1. They will require Elisha to begin repayment according to the schedule, since Levi did not mean it and there were no designated witnesses to his statement.
2. They will declare the loan forgiven, since Levi admitted to the Beis Din that it was forgiven.

During the Shemitah year, it is forbidden for Jews in the Eretz Yisrael to plant or harvest agricultural produce. Many rely on the Heter Mechira as a way to avoid these restrictions. According to the opinions that permit the use of Heter Mechira and allow working the land and consumption of produce grown under this arrangement, would this leniency still apply once, G-d willing, Shemitah in Eretz Yisrael returns to a Torah‑level obligation?

According to most poskim, when should a pruzbul be written?

1. Right before the Shemitah year begins
2. Any time during the Shemitah year
3. Immediately before the end of the Shemitah year

When writing a pruzbul, one transfers all outstanding loans to a Beis Din. How does this allow the lender to collect the loan after the Shemitah year?

1. Because Shemitah cancels only agricultural obligations, not monetary ones.
2. Because Beis Din is not subject to the Torah’s prohibition against collecting loans after Shemitah.
3. Because transferring the loan makes it automatically repayable before Shemitah.
4. Because a pruzbul permanently cancels the laws of Shemitah.

Harry Brochstein and Marty Kroll are 50–50 partners in Boca Rattan, a furniture store in West Boca. Marty manages the store full‑time, while Harry is essentially a silent partner. Marty regularly collects all the cash from sales and periodically gives Harry his share, and Harry has never been particular about the timing.

As the end of the Shemitah year approaches, Marty realizes he will not be able to pay Harry his outstanding share before Shemitah ends. Since this unpaid amount is considered money Marty owes Harry, would Harry need to prepare a pruzbul specifically to protect the money that Marty owes him so that Shemitah does not cancel the debt?

1. No, because only written loans are cancelled by Shemitah, not verbal agreements
2. No, because partnership profits are not considered a loan and Shemitah does not cancel them
3. Yes, because any money owed between Jews is cancelled by Shemitah unless protected by a pruzbul
4. Yes, but only if the partnership was formed during the Shemitah year

Jo Jo Shehebar loaned his mechutan, Isaac Dwek, $2,000 for 30 days, but for the next ten years, Jo Jo repeatedly asked Isaac to repay the loan, but Isaac continually pushed him off. Eventually, Jo Jo brought the matter before the Great Neck Beis Din.

“I’m happy to repay the loan,” Isaac said, openly admitting that he had indeed borrowed the money. “But only if Jo Jo can prove that he wrote a pruzbul. If he didn’t, then the loan was automatically cancelled at the last Shemitah year.”

“Of course I wrote a pruzbul!” Jo Jo replied. But since the most recent Shemitah year had ended about five years earlier, he no longer had any written proof, nor did he have witnesses who could testify that he had executed a pruzbul.

How should the Beis Din rule?

1. Make Isaac pay — The Beis Din will obligate Isaac to repay the loan since he admitted to the loan and we believe Jo Jo when he said he did execute a pruzbul.
2. Do not make Isaac pay — The Beis Din will rule that the loan was cancelled by Shemitah due to lack of proof of a pruzbul.

A kesubah written before marriage is a valid halachic contract that obligates the groom to his wife. Such a contract is fully enforceable in beis din and even creates a lien on all of the groom’s assets. The Shulchan Aruch lists five requirements that a document must meet in order to be considered a valid, enforceable contract of this type. What are the five conditions that make a contract—such as a kesubah—halachically valid in the eyes of a beis din?

“Ruby” Kashnow held two loan documents in his hands. The first was for a loan to Moshe’s Pizza and was signed by Moshe along with two kosher Jewish witnesses. The second was for a loan to Reb Yudel Ehrenreich; it bore Reb Yudel’s signature and was notarized by a notary public commissioned by the State of New York.

From a halachic standpoint, which document is stronger in Beis Din?

1. The document with witnesses
2. The notarized document
3. Both documents are equally valid

Moishe of Moishe’s Pizza was plotzing. It was past midnight, and he still needed $20,000 for his daughter’s wedding that very afternoon. At last, Ruby Kashnow—a well-known local lender—knocked on his window. Ruby agreed to lend the money, but added, “Listen, Moishe, I love your pizza, but I can’t pay my accountant with slices. I need a formal loan document with two witnesses.”

Ruby pulled out the document and began filling in the details.

“But it’s almost two in the morning! Where am I supposed to find witnesses now?” Moishe protested.

Ruby didn’t budge.

So Moishe tried again: “How about I sign the document and write next to my signature, ‘My signature should be considered the same as 100 witnesses’? Then even if something goes wrong, you'll be able to collect in Beis Din without any questions.”

Is Moishe’s offer too good for even Ruby to refuse?

1. Yes — Ruby should accept Moishe’s proposal because the statement will make the document halachically the same as if there were two witnesses.
2. No — Ruby should insist on proper witnesses.

"Ruby" Kashnow presented the signed loan agreement to the Yorkville Beis Din.

“Honorable judges, I helped Moishe when he was in a tight spot, but he didn’t show the same kindness and pay me back on time.”

Moishe immediately protested. “What are you talking about? That document doesn't have witnesses on it, and even if it did, I paid that loan back already!”

Ruby responded, “Then why would I still have the contract? You should have demanded it back when you paid and then destroyed it.”

Based on all the evidence presented, how will the Beis Din rule?

1. Moishe is exonerated — he does not need to pay anything.
2. Moishe must pay half of the amount claimed.
3. Moishe must pay two‑thirds of the amount claimed.
4. Moishe must pay the full amount claimed.
5. The Beis Din may assess the reliability of all the evidence and issue a ruling for an amount different from any of the options above, based on their evaluation.

Isaac Dwek contacted Negin of Negin’s Persian Kitchen to provide authentic Persian food at the Shabbos Sheva Brochos in his home, with a $2,000 budget (Isaac would have his own housekeeper and other daughters deal with the serving and cleanup). Isaac and Negin did not discuss any payment terms. On Motza’ei Shabbos, all the guests had nothing but rave reviews for the food, especially the Fesenjan and Ghormeh Sabzi served for Shabbos lunch .

When is the latest that Mr. Dwek is halachically obligated to pay Negin, and if it is not paid on time, when is the earliest Negin may take Mr. Dwek to the Great Neck Beis Din?

1. The payment would be due at 30 days, but Negin could not go to Beis Din until a year had passed without payment.
2. The payment would be due at 30 days, and Negin could go to Beis Din the same day if it was not paid.
3. The payment would be due immediately, but Negin could not go to Beis Din until 30 days had passed.
4. The payment would be due at 90 days, and Negin could go to Beis Din only after giving a formal warning.

Question: Mr. X's neighbor knocks on his door and asks to borrow a hammer.

Levi lent Elisha $250,000 to start his bicycle store. To ensure repayment, Levi drafted a detailed loan contract, signed by two kosher witnesses. The loan was executed on July 1 and was due on December 31.

At the Tisha B’Av break‑fast at Congregation Shaarei Shamayim, Levi bumped into Elisha. “Don’t worry,” Elisha said. “My store is already open, and I expect to pay you in full by December 31.” “I appreciate that,” Levi replied. “But honestly, I don’t need the money right now. You can even take a full year to pay me back. Relax — build up your store and your client base.” Elisha was very grateful.

But just before Chanukah, the markets took a downturn and Levi suddenly needed cash. He approached Elisha and asked him to pay by the original due date. Elisha refused.

On the morning of December 31, Levi took Elisha to Beis Din. “I have a signed contract with two witnesses stating the loan is due today. I need the money now, and Elisha is refusing to pay!”

Elisha responded, “Yes, the contract says December 31. But Levi told me at the break‑fast that I had a full year to pay, not just six months.”

The judges turned to Levi, who was turning red. “Yes, I did say that,” he admitted. “But at the time I didn’t need the money. I was just trying to be nice. Still, a contract is a contract, and I need the money now.”

How will the Beis Din rule

1. They will require Elisha to repay the loan today, December 31, as stated in the written contract.
2. They will allow Elisha to keep the money for another six months, based on Levi’s verbal extension at the break‑fast.

After benching at a wedding at the luxurious Lakeville Country Club, Mr. Khodedadian realized he had no cash to tip the waiters or valets.

“Can you lend me $100?” he asked Mr. Dwek, who agreed and handed him two $50 bills. “Just please pay me back in a month.”

But a month passed, and Mr. Khodedadian did not repay the loan.

When Mr. Dwek later bumped into him at the Great Neck Sefardi Synagogue and asked for the money, Mr. Khodedadian claimed he owed only $50 and didn’t even have cash on him.

Mr. Dwek wanted to recover the full $100, but he knew that if he took Mr. Khodedadian to the Great Neck Beis Din, the judges would not require a modeh b’miktzas oath and would instead try to arrange a compromise. At that moment, he realized that if he claimed he had lent $125 or even $150, the Beis Din would likely compromise somewhere near $100. And if he received more than $100, he could return the excess to Mr. Khodedadian afterward.

Is Mr. Dwek permitted to lie in order to “ensure justice” and recover the full $100 he is owed?

After benching at a wedding at the luxurious Lakeville Country Club, Mr. Khodedadian realized he had no cash to tip the waiters or valets.

“Can you lend me $150?” he asked Mr. Dwek. “Sorry, I only have $50,” Mr. Dwek replied.

But Mr. Aminoff and Mr. Shehebar overheard and each offered to lend him $50 as well. “Please pay us back in a month,” they all said.

A month passed, and Mr. Khodedadian did not repay any of them.

When Mr. Dwek later bumped into him at the Great Neck Sefardi Synagogue and mentioned the loan, Mr. Khodedadian denied receiving any money from him. “And what about the $50 from Mr. Aminoff and Mr. Shehebar?” asked Mr. Dwek. “I have no idea what you’re talking about,” Mr. Khodedadian insisted.

After synagogue, Mr. Dwek called Mr. Aminoff and Mr. Shehebar. “What can we do?” he asked. “If we take him to Beis Din, he’ll deny everything. They won’t make him take a modeh b’miktzas oath, and the best we’ll get is a compromise — maybe $25 each.”

Mr. Aminoff had an idea: “Why don’t you claim he borrowed $150 from you, and we’ll testify as witnesses? With two witnesses, the Beis Din will force him to pay $150. Then we’ll split it three ways and each get back exactly the $50 we’re owed — not a penny more.”

“Right!” said Mr. Shehebar. “We don’t want to steal — we just want justice!”

May the three men carry out this plan and lie in front of the Great Neck Beis Din in order to recover the money they are owed?