RE: Open containers of milk in a non-Jewish store-

SUBSTITUTION AND ADULTERATION OF CHOLOV YISROEL

The following article was brought to my attention.

http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/headlines-breaking-stories/453815/the-great-open-milk-bottle-controversy.html

since there are major errors in this article "factual and Halachik",  I am forced to publish the proper view according to our SHULCAHN ARUCH. The issue we will deal with is using milk in an open container being labeled with a CHOLOV YISROEL label (Golden Flow, Pride of the Farm, etc), at a NON JEWISH convenience store. The author claims the laws governing this type of transaction are contained in SIMAN 118 (the 108 which is printed is probably a typo). This is 100% wrong. SIMAN 118 is discussing milk which is owned by a JEW and is being stored or transported by a NON JEW. 

In the scenario of a convenience store the milk is entirely owned by the NON JEW and he is selling it with the claim (inferred from the label on the bottle) that this is CHOLOV YISROEL. This is covered by the SHULCHAN ARUCH in SIMAN 114 SIF 4 כל אלו המשקים וכן החומץ של שכר אסור לקנותם מהם אם דמיהם יקרים מדמי היין שאנו חוששים שמא עירב בהו יין (עד שאין ס' לבטלו) בד''א כשמוכרים בחנות אבל אם רואה שמוציאים אותו מהחבית מותר ולא חיישינן שמא עירב בו יין שאם היה מערב יין בהחבית היה מתקלקל   

In SIF 5 it says as follows יין רמונים שמוכרים לרפואה מותר ללוקחו מהתגר אפילו שלא מהחבית אע''פ שדמיו יקרים מהיין משום דכיון דאית ביה קפידא לא מרע נפשיה  We see clearly from here that the rule of  לא מרע נפשיה  only applies to a TAGAR and not a CHANUS. A convenience store would definitely be classified as a CHANUS. In addition since the price of CHOLOV YISROEL is about $3.00  per gallon more than supermarket milk, we have also met the threshold of  דמיהם יקריםone would therefore be 100% prohibited from purchasing a coffee with milk from an open bottle in a convenience store.

The spoilage issue is dealt with by the Shulchan Aruch in the Bais Yosef on SIF 4. The Bais Yosef explains even though one is allowed to buy from the CHANUS when he sees the drink being taken from a barrel because we assume that the owner would not pour wine in the barrel since it tends to spoil the contents of the barrel, we still say that he is not allowed to buy the drinks being poured from smaller containers in the CHANUS, why do we not make the same assumption that the wine will spoil the contents. 

This is because the wine poured into containers are in small amounts and the containers are used up frequently therefore there is no fear of spoilage to inhibit the owner from adulterating the drink. The same applies to milk, we are not suspect that the owner will buy 10 gallons of supermarket milk and fill 20 CHOLOV YISROEL bottles and keep them for a week, but instead will buy one or two gallons and fill 2 or 4 containers for a one or two day supply where spoilage is nonexistent.

The lawsuit issue. Even though the mathematical possibility exists for a law suit we still have to use common sense and see if this possibility would deter a convenience store owner from substituting milk. The McDonalds law suit was filed by a major law firm which had the resources for this type of undertaking and hoped for a return on the investment, since McDonalds is a company with major assets. No normal law firm would expend tens of thousands of dollars filing a law suit against a convenience store whose owner has no assets. 

There is no normal convenience store owner in his right mind that would let the fear of a ten million dollar law suit deter him from saving $3.00 a gallon on milk. Even if we know for sure that the owner is a chronic paranoid he could also substitute the milk in his house and bring it to the store.  Therefore making sure the only way he could be caught would be to test the DNA in his milk against the DNA of all the CHOLOV YISROEL cows and prove that it doesn’t match.

We have a clear Halacha in the Shulchan Aruch which prohibits purchasing milk from a convenience store. There is no plausible HETER to permit this. For anyone wishing to read about how this Halacha was violated several years ago by a major Kashrus organization with a major food manufacturer you can download the followinghttp://www.bohirus.com/pdf/current/shufra.pdf                                                          

Toshav Monsey                                                                                                                 toshav@optimum.net

THIS EXXON IS UNDER THE "KCL". SEE THE CHOLOV AKUM TOGETHER WITH THE CHOLOV YISROEL, for the worker to pour into the cholov yisroel as needed.

BTW- Cholov akum in the USA is Cholov Treif per Reb Moshe in a Teshuva, and Rav Eliyashev, Rav Wosner, Rav Shlomo Zalman, etc.

In Germany it may be Cholov Stam per Reb Moshes Teshuva.          

                                                           

Shatnez Alert:

­ Important Notice אלול תשפ"ד   As we prepare for the ימי הרחמים והסליחות, we must all recommit to following the מצות of the תורה.   שעטנז is a מצוה that some people unfortunately neglect. It is seldom discussed publicly, but the consequences of ignoring shatnez laws are significant and should not be underestimated.   As אידן, we are obligated to follow the שולחן ערוך, which mandates testing woolen garments made by non-Jews for shatnez. Trusting the salesperson's word, even if the garment had been shatnez-free, would still violate shatnez laws.    Just as you cannot consider a store kosher based solely on the owner's word, so too, you cannot rely on a salesperson's assurance regarding a garment's shatnez status. It is your crucial responsibility to ensure the garments you wear are shatnez-free.     ,ולמזהיר ולנזהר שלומים תן כמי נהר   ועד למשמרת שעטנז ­ Shatnez Notice! אלול תשפ"ד Custom Chinese Suits! The current trend involves having a tailor in the United States measure you for a suit, which is then manufactured in China. However, numerous custom suits with various brand names, despite being marketed as shatnez-free by Jewish sellers, have been discovered to contain shatnez. We've included one such instance below. ­ ­ The Jewish seller assured the customer that the custom suit shown above would be free of shatnez. Luckily, the customer was aware of the unreliability of these guarantees and had the suit tested. Shatnez was discovered in the collar, which contained a linen undercollar.  ­ Did you know....   The דבר שמואל states in תשובה קעח that those in positions of Rabbinical authority must examine all types of garments and inform the public about shatnez concerns. He mentions that the של"ה הקדוש did so in his ספר, and alerted the public to shatnez garments. You can view the דבר שמואל by clicking here.    ­ Click here to subscribe to our emails. Vaad L'Mishmeres Shatnez Lakewood, New Jersey 08701 1-877-4-SHATNEZ vaadlmishmeresshatnez@gmail.com Unsubscribe

The NJ Tax Court is questioning the validity of the basis of some Tax-Exempt properties- OCTOBER 1ST IS THE CRITICAL DATE FOR TAX EXEMPTION!

http://www.njnonprofits.org/AmicusBriefFiled_PrincetonU.html

Property Tax Challenge
Center Files Second Amicus Brief in Princeton Property Tax Exemption Case
Updated January 12, 2016
On January 5, 2016, the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, denied Princeton University's motion to appeal of a ruling regarding the burden of proof in the Fields vs. Trustees of Princeton University property tax exemption case.  In December 2015, the Center for Non-Profits, represented by pro bono counsel Lowenstein Sandler LLP and joined by five other organizations, filed an amicus (friend of the court) brief in support of a motion filed by Princeton University in the challenge to its property tax exemption, a case now making its way through the courts that could have implications for many non-profits in New Jersey.
Although the Court granted the Center's request to join as friends of the court in the most recent filing, it more importantly denied the University’s motion to appeal, which means that the burden is still on the University to (re)prove its property tax exemption as the case goes to trial.
The University's most recent appeal was filed in response to Tax Court Judge Vito Bianco’s November 5, 2015, ruling that the University has the burden of re-proving its property tax exemption in response to the residents’ challenge, even if it has been deemed by the municipal tax assessor to be tax exempt.  The Center is deeply concerned that this standard, which appears to have little substantiation in existing case law, would make all non-profit property owners highly vulnerable to challenges from disgruntled residents that would be extremely costly and time consuming to defend, siphoning scarce resources away from their charitable programs. The Center was joined in this brief by the Alliance for the Betterment of Citizens with Disabilities; Eva’s Village; New Jersey Association of Community Providers; New Jersey Association of Mental Health and Addiction Agencies; and Volunteers of America Delaware Valley.
Background
In Fields v. Trustees of Princeton University, a case attracting national attention, four Princeton residents are seeking to revoke the entire property tax exemption of Princeton University based on a far-reaching set of grounds, including the University’s investments; the payment of patent royalties to some of its faculty pursuant to federal statute; and certain fee-based operations such as cafés.
Since 2001, New Jersey law has provided for a prorated property tax exemption structure under which a property owned by a charitable organization that is used for mixed purposes, both charitable and non-charitable, is only subject to tax on the non-charitable portion.  Yet the plaintiffs in the Princeton case are seeking to revoke the University’s property tax exemption in its entirety based on allegations surrounding some of the University’s properties, without regard to their proportion in relation to the University’s mission or other exempt functions.  Unlike many of the other property tax challenges across the nation, in this case the municipality is named as a co-defendant.
- See more at: http://www.njnonprofits.org/AmicusBriefFiled_PrincetonU.html#sthash.KcHDguEG.dpuf