In a shiur I was in we were discussing some aspects of valuation for something that is falling and about to break.

Apparently in the 2nd perek of Bava Kama it is discussed that if someone hit a falling item (such as a vase) that was about to smash onto the ground, we can say that they didn't cause any loss to the owner of the item since the item was about to become worthless.

And it was also discussed how this same concept really does not apply if the falling item is a living person.

I wanted to consider how to evaluate the following two cases of a hypothetical spectacular catch, perhaps by someone who works as a fireman catching people jumping from burning buildings.

Suppose there were a valuable and fragile piece of electronics falling from a building, and someone with a fish net, or someone who happened to be carrying a mattress, managed to catch it without breaking it just before its owner expected it to have been smashed.

Do we say that the catcher caught a pile of broken shards of electronics and added value up to a working electronic device by his catch?

Or would we expect the original owner of the item to run over and thank the catcher and take the whole item?

Alternatively...

If what was falling were a live person, do we say that the catcher had an obligation to save the falling person?

The falling person themselves may have thought their life was over and would credit the hero with giving their life back... reference Lois Lane being caught in mid air on more than one occasion by Superman.

But perhaps since there was a way to save this life, perhaps to have written that person off as dead is a problem?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Rabbi Mitterhoff,

Quote "Do we say that the catcher caught a pile of broken shards of electronics and added value up to a working electronic device by his catch?"

Off the bat, without looking into the Sugya, I would say it still remains the owners. The Ramban explains that it's not really considered broken, but rather worthless. Thus when saved, it goes back to an item that is worth something. Even the other Rishonim that consider that it's broken, I think that is only if at the end it broke, so it was considered broke when it was in motion to brake. But if it never broke at the end, then retroactively, I would say it wasn't considered broken at anytime.

quote:

Originally posted by rob:
In a shiur I was in we were discussing some aspects of valuation for something that is falling and about to break.

Apparently in the 2nd perek of Bava Kama it is discussed that if someone hit a falling item (such as a vase) that was about to smash onto the ground, we can say that they didn't cause any loss to the owner of the item since the item was about to become worthless.

And it was also discussed how this same concept really does not apply if the falling item is a living person.

I would say that there is a problem in the first place by smashing the vase mid-air. The vase would last that much longer if it had not been smashed in the air, and there is still the chance it wouldn't break, even after falling on the ground.(I have much experience with this, honestly, in real life.)
Of COURSE if it's a person you must at least try to save them. Only a real inhumane person would not.

Quote "there is still the chance it wouldn't break,"

The case was that it was thrown off a roof.

AND Rav Chaim: even falling off a roof, the vase might not break!

There are things called bushes, garbage bins, and other small items sitting at the sides of buildings which normally breakable things land in all the time, and hence, do not break.

I have children. I was a child. I have actually seen breakable things not break when landing in various ways and onto various surfaces.

Besides, in the late 1980's there was a Russian stewardess who fell thousands of feet from a passenger plane midair....it was in the international news. She survived even though she didn't have a parachute, and without a scratch. I would have to guess that YHVH was executing the principle I am trying to convey here. So there.

Quote ": even falling off a roof, the vase might not break!"

True, anything is possible, but in Jewish law remote possibilities don't have any Halachic status. If we assess from the height and velocity and in what is it's flight pattern in all probabilities that it would have broken anyhow, we consider it broken by the time it was thrown. We need not to take into account what may happen in minority of minorities chance.