THE JERUSALEM INSTITUTE OF JEWISH LAW 
Rabbi Emanuel Quint, Dean

Lesson # 110 (part one) • Torts Against Neighbors

As we discussed in the last lesson, there were three torts that we were concerned with when neighbors own a common courtyard that is in front of their house, and their houses face each other over the courtyard A. The ingress and egress from each house is over the courtyard A. The same might very well hold in a large building that contains condominiums or perhaps even cooperative apartments. Very often the by-laws will have specific criteria as to who they will permit to buy into the building. Some buildings in senior citizens developments especially in Florida restrict the amount of children permitted and the amount of persons who may reside in any apartment.

The torts discussed were (1) increasing the traffic; (2) overviewing; and (3) blocking out light.

We shall begin with the topic of increasing traffic.

Getting back to our example of the last lesson where the Cohens and Levis bought a two family house as partners. Until now both the Cohens and the Levies knew exactly what to expect in the way of traffic into and out of their common owned halls in the house. Each knew the habits of the other, when they went shopping, when they entertained their friends and relatives.

However, with Ruth Cohen and her children moving in, the Levies are, to say the least unhappy. The halachah is that neither party may permit additional persons who are not members of his immediate family to occupy part of his house if it increases the traffic into and/or out of the house. Since the Cohen daughter and grandchildren are part of the immediate family the Levis cannot enjoin them from living there. Their remedy would have been to enter into an agreement before they purchased the house to set forth their conduct in the house; failing to do that the Levies will have to bear it. Of course the Levis can bring their daughter from Monsey and her husband and ten children to spend the next summer with them.

Rabbi Moses Isserles (the Ramo, whom the Ashekenazic Jews generally follow in halachah, writes that there is an opinion that the Cohens (and of course the Levies) can bring into the house as many sleep-in guests and acquaintances as they wants provided that the Cohens do not add to the structure. Even this opinion will admit that if one house (as distinguished from a two family house) or one apartment is shared by two partners, Yehudah and Naftali, neither partner may add sleep-in guests or acquaintances to his part of the house, nor may either partner enter into the part of the house occupied by the other, except for areas agreed upon such as the kitchen, living room and bath rooms, etc.

The Cohens may sublease their own apartment to anyone they please, such as to the Goldbergs and the Levies cannot object that they do not like the Goldbergs.

Getting back to the situation where Reuven and Shimon each owns one house with their houses facing the common courtyard A owned by both of them, Reuven may subdivide his house. This is, provided, that it is not used to increase the inhabitants of the house such as permitting an additional family to move into part of the subdivided space, because these additional people will increase the traffic in courtyard A.

If Reuven leases his house to a tenant, Levi, Levi may not permit others to reside with him since this increases the traffic into courtyard A. Reuven (and Shimon) may obtain from Beth Din an injunction to preclude such conduct on Levi’s part. However, all those who depend upon Levi for support may occupy the house with him, and neither Reuven nor Shimon may object.
A frequent question arises where the current house is one story tall and one of the co-owners of the courtyard A wishes to build another floor on top of his current single story building. What is the halachah?

Reuven may build a second floor onto his house provided the entrance to the second floor does not go out into courtyard A, for that will increase the traffic into courtyard A. He may build the second floor although he waited a long time after he received permission from the building department to build the second floor. Even if the second floor was built at the time he built the house he cannot thereafter make a new door or other opening in the second floor that will face courtyard A, since it will increase traffic into courtyard A. The entrance to the second floor must come from the first floor so that there are no new openings fromthe second floor into courtyard A.

What is said regarding second floors also holds true regarding a second house: that is, Reuven can build a second house on his land facing courtyard A, provided the second house does not have an opening into courtyard A. The second house may have an opening into his old house unless it has another entrance from the secondhouse into another courtyard.
Reuven. who owns one house that has a front door in courtyard A, purchases a second house, the front door of which opens into another courtyard, courtyard B, or into another street. The back of the second house faces courtyard A, but does not have any opening onto courtyard A. Reuven wishes to make a second door in theback of the second house so that it will lead into courtyard A. Reuven may not do so. If Reuven closes up the entrance of the new house into its courtyard, the second house may have its entrance into the old house, which has its front door in courtyard A. This will not increase the traffic into courtyard A.

The added-on second floor or the new house may be used for storage only but not for additional residents (other than increases in his own immediate family) because this increases the traffic in the courtyard A.

What is seen from this lesson and from the prior lesson is that there are no absolute answers when neighbors enter into disagreements. The best course of conduct is to have written agreements covering many aspects of what co-owners of property can anticipate will face them in the future. This is not full proof. First ofall there are many things that cold not have been anticipated when the agreement was drawn. Also very often agreements become ambiguous as time progresses; that which the parties thought was adequately set forth looks less and less certain as time goes on. Most important the partners should be understanding of the needsof each other.

They should study some books such as Mesilat Yeharim so that they will learn how to act toward each other. Each must bend on his rights a little bit. The type of conduct proposed b the Mussaar sefarim will avoid most problems by and among neighbors, so that thy will continue to be friends.
The subject matter of this lesson is more fully discussed in Vol. V, Ch.154 of A Restatement of Rabbinic Civil Law by E. Quint, published by Jason Aronson, Inc. and on sale at local Judaica bookstores.

Questions to quint@inter.net.il