Sefer HaChinuch ספר החינוך

The commandment on the court to judge the damages of an animal: To judge in the case of a damaging ox — whether it [injures] a person, as it is written in the section of (Exodus 21:28), “If it gores,” or whether it damages [assets], as it is written in the section of (Exodus 21:35), “If it hurts (yigof).” And the main understanding of hurting [here] is to push (Rashi on Exodus 21:35). However, whether it damages with its body or its feet, or it bites with its teeth, or even if it damages with its horns, it is all implied by the expression of hurting. But goring only implies with the horn (Bava Kamma 2b). [Still,] the [other] injuries of a man by an ox have already been included; as it is written in the section of “If it gores,” “and it kills” (Exodus 21:28) — since it implies killing in any case, whether it is with goring or whether it is with other things (Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael 21:28:2). And it is not specifically an ox, but rather we are even obligated for any domesticated animal or wild animal or bird that has damaged. [However], it is only that the verse stated [that] which was common. And we have already said that all of the commandments that come about the matter of justice have one root to them and it is a rational thing. And [so] I do not have to review it with each and every one.

The laws of the commandment — for example, which is a muad (known as likely to cause damage) or a tam (tame) and the difference between them (Bava Kamma 23b) and the things that an animal is muad about from the beginning (Bava Kamma 16b) and the things for which it is not a muad until we saw that it is accustomed to them; how is this matter of getting accustomed to the point that we assume it to be a muad, and in what way does it give up this custom, such that it returns to being a tam; the five types of wild animals that are muad from the beginning; the distinction [created] by the domain wherein it damages; that which is called the main categories (avot) of damages (Bava Kamma 2a) and that which is called the derivatives (toledot), and the distinction that exists between them in one [of the derivatives]; the laws of guarding (Bava Kamma 45b) in which a person is obligated to guard them that they not damage, and how does he become obligated or exempt from them; and the rest of their many details — are [all] elucidated in the first six chapters of Bava Kamma. (See Tur, Choshen Mishpat 291.) And we have already said [about] these laws that are called the laws of penalties, that only a court of ordained [judges] in the Land of Israel can judge them (Sefer HaChinukh 49:1). But the damager must nonetheless pay by the laws of the Heavens (Bava Metzia 91a); and if [the injured party] grabbed the [value of] the damage, we certainly do not remove it from him (Bava Kamma 15b).