The answer is: according to the authoritative position of the school, the debt falls due in full, with nothing deducted from it, because twelve thousand was established as a liability upon the deceased, and had he remained alive, he would not have paid it until after one year.

However, it could be said that if he dies so soon—on the very day of the purchase—then the creditor should be entitled only to the car’s present value, since the price has not changed; or it may be said to him: Take back your car, for nothing has happened to it.

The conclusion, then, is that if the debtor becomes insolvent, his debt does not fall due; rather, it remains deferred.

If the debtor dies, the matter is subject to detail: if the heirs secure the creditor’s right with an adequate pledge, or provide a solvent guarantor, then the debt remains deferred and does not fall due, because there is no harm to the creditor. But if they provide neither a pledge nor a solvent guarantor, then the debt falls due, lest his right be lost.

There remains the issue we raised: does the debt fall due in full, or should the amount exceeding the present cash price be deducted from it?

The authoritative position of the school is that the debt falls due in full, because it is a debt established as a liability upon the deceased, and so it remains as it was. What ought to be said, however, is that the debt should not fall due in full, lest the heirs be treated unjustly.

His statement: “If a creditor appears after the division, he may recover his proportional share from the creditors.”