Study Bava Kamma folio 28A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
You can keep this question to yourself, as it poses no difficulty at all. Ben Bag Bag states an individual opinion in this regard, and the Rabbis disagree with him.
R' Yannai says an alternative response to Rav Kahana’s objection: What does the baraita mean by the phrase: Break his teeth? It means sue him in judgment.
The Talmud asks: If so, the subsequent statement in the baraita: And say to him, is inaccurate. It should have stated: And they, the court, say to him. Likewise, the wording: I am taking what is mine, is inaccurate. Since it is the court who makes this statement, the baraita should have stated:
The Talmud suggests: Come and hear an alternative proof for Rav Naḥman’s opinion. It is stated in a baraita: With regard to an ox that climbed on the back of another ox to kill it, and the owner of the ox on the bottom came and removed his ox, and the ox on top consequently fell and died, the owner
The Talmud rejects this proof: No, the ruling is with regard to a case where the attacker is an innocuous ox, where there is a loss for the owner of the ox on the bottom if he does not save it, since the owner of an innocuous ox pays for only half the damages resulting from his ox’s attack.