From: Rabbi Moshe Sofer
To: Unknown recipient
The Chasam Sofer addresses a difficulty raised by the Tiferes Shmuel against the anonymous ruling (matzah kasuv) in the Beis Yosef that third parties must heed a single witness's testimony about libated wine even when the owner contradicts it. He resolves that the matzah kasuv applies only when the owner is a nogei'a b'davar (financially interested party), making his contradiction ineffective, whereas Abaye's case of a sodomized ordinary ox involves no financial interest, so the owner's protest is a genuine refutation that nullifies the testimony for everyone.
Source: Shu"t Chasam Sofer YD §121