Answering Theoretical Questions regarding Financial Disputes
Hearing Both Sides of the Story
The halachah is that a dayan (a judge in a Beis Din) may not listen to one litigant in a Choshen Mishpat (financial) dispute unless the other litigant is present—ze bifnei ze. Furthermore, even if a hypothetical question is put to a rav asking his opinion bederech im timtza lomar, im kein hu, i.e. “What would the halachah be if such and such were the case?”, the rav may not express his opinion. This is because a person may deduce from the rav’s answer how to get a favorable outcome at the actual Din Torah and falsify the facts accordingly. Another reason is that when the other side of the story will be heard at the actual Din Torah, the dayan may have to give a different psak, which would reflect poorly on him, and thereby cause a potential disparagement of a talmid chacham (Torah scholar). There are cases where halachah permits a rav to answer a theoretical Choshen Mishpat question; however, these days one has to be very cautious lest people learn to make false claims and/or misquote the rav. The Tzemach Tzedek rules that even if a borer (an arbiter chosen by the litigant) comes to a rav with a question, the rav may only give his opinion if the question is presented by both borerim. #306
https://halacha2go.com?number=306