Yerushalmi Bava Kamma 7:5 ירושלמי בבא קמא ז׳:ה׳

MISHNAH: One who sold it except for a one percent interest in it⁷²If he did not sell the animal outright, Ex. 21:37 is not applicable. As Mekhilta dR. Simeon ben Ioḥai (p. 191) explains, slaughter and sale are treated on an equal footing in the verse. Since slaughter is all or nothing, a sale must be all or nothing., or had a partnership interest in it⁷³It was not completely stolen; cf. Note 54., one who slaughtered and it became a carcass in his hand⁷⁴If the carcass is unfit for Jewish consumption, he killed the animal but did not slaughter it; Ex. 21:37 is not applicable., or one who stabs or tears out⁷⁵He kills the animal by tearing out some vital organ; the carcass is not fit for Jewish consumption., pays double restitution but not quadruple or quintuple.
He who stole on the owner’s property but slaughtered or sold off their property⁷⁶By moving the animal off the property he took possession. This makes him a thief and subject to the law of quadruple or quintuple restitution., or stole off their property and slaughtered or sold on their property, or stole and slaughtered or sold off their property has to pay quadruple or quintuple restitution. But if he stole and slaughtered or sold on their property⁷⁷If he never took possession, he cannot be called a thief and cannot be prosecuted under the terms of Ex. 21:37., he is not liable.

HALAKHAH: “One who sold it except for a one percent interest in it,” etc. “He who stole on the owner’s property,” etc. Rebbi Ze‘ira asked: It he sold it in halves, what is the rule⁷⁸He sold the entire animal to one person but in two transactions.? If he sold half of it to one person and the other half to another, what is the rule? Let us hear from the following⁷⁹Tosephta 7:18; essentially the same text is in the Babli, 78b, only except that the Babli in the statements of the anonymous Tanna and of Rebbi for “he pays” has “he does not pay” and vice-versa (similarly in Mekhilta dR. Simeon ben Ioḥai p. 191). The Babli text conforms to the Mishnah; the Yerushalmi-Tosephta text contradicts the Mishnah and defies rational explanation. Since the text is confirmed by all three Yerushalmi and both Tosephta mss., it cannot be emended, as noted by Rashba, Novellae ad 78b.: “If he sold it except for its forefoot, except for its hindfoot, except for its horn, except for its shearings⁸⁰Since the sheep could be sold except for its wool and then the seller could shear it before delivery, the sheep was essentially sold completely in two transactions. Therefore, the answer to R. Ze‘ira’s question depends entirely onwhether in this case one reads “he pays” or “he does not pay”., he pays quadruple or quintuple restitution. Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon⁸¹In all other sources: R. Simeon ben Eleazar. says, except for its horn he pays double restitution, except for its shearings he pays quadruple or quintuple restitution⁸²He agrees with the Mishnah but holds that the wool is external to the sheep, not part of its intrinsic body.. Rebbi says, except for a vital organ he pays quadruple or quintuple restitution; except for a non-vital organ he is not liable.”