Garićki pavlinski samostan bio je značajan feudalac s brojnim posjedima, selištima i kmetovima na području Križevačke županije. Posjede su stjecali darovanjima, zakupom te kupnjom zbog čega dolazi ponekad do sukoba sa susjedima i drugim zainteresiranim strankama. Pavlini često razrješenje sukoba i pravdu traže kroz sudske parnice. Parnice su uglavnom pokretali zbog smetanja posjeda, nepoštivanja oporuka, te raznih nasilja učinjenih njima i njihovim kmetovima. Ponekad su, također, pavlini te njihovi postupci bili predmet tužbe. Samostan je, također, slovio kao sigurno i pouzdano mjesto pa lokalno plemstvo prepušta pavlinima na čuvanje svoje dragocjenosti. U nekim slučajevima primopredaja pohranjenih stvari ne prolazi bez problema. Kako nije sačuvan popis čuvanih dragocjenosti, vjerojatno je više primopredaja obavljeno na obostrano zadovoljstvo. Usprkos velikog broja primjera sukobljavanja garićkih pavlina te plemkinja i plemića Križevačke županije, isprave kazuju da je većina sukoba razriješena te da je garićki pavlinski samostan imao istaknutu ulogu u kasnosrednjovjekovnoj Križevačkoj županiji. Naime, nerijetko su dotad sukobljene strane počele surađivati, ili su se nekadašnji neprijatelji sjetili svojih suparnika pri objavljivanju posljednje volje., The Blessed Virgin Mary monastery on Garić (Moslavačka gora) is the oldest Pauline monastery on the territory of present day Croatia. Some clues, which date back to as early as 1257, point to the existence of a hermit dwelling on the very location of the Pauline monastery on Moslavina Hill, which was explicitly mentioned for the first time in 1273. This renowned monastery was supported by local landowners, as well as the king, and was used as a depository for valuable objects. It was destroyed in an Ottoman raid in the 16th century and was never rebuilt. Systematic archeological investigations have been conducted on this site since 2009. The Paulines of Garić held estates in the Garić and Gračenica districts, which became a part of the great Križevci County in the middle of the fourteenth century. Some of the most famous aristocratic families, such as Moslavački (de Monoszlo), Čupor Moslavački (Csupor de Monoszlo), Babonić, Ruh od Deče (Ruh de Desce), Kastelanović (Castelan), Kapitanić (Capitan), Geletić iz Sredne (Geleth, Gele de Zredna), Paližna (Palichna) and after 1493 Erdödy, also held estates there. In addition, the influence of the bishops of Zagreb could be felt in the area since the second half of the 13th century. The relationship between the nobility of the Križevci County and the Garić Paulines was complex. Some noblemen fostered neighborly relations and traditionally bestowed gifts to the Church of the Holly Virgin Mary on Garić, while some individuals and even whole families often clashed with the Paulines. There are, however, examples of positive interaction between the Paulines and their former adversaries. For example, the widow of a longtime adverse party left her considerable fortune to the monastery, where she wished to be buried. Another woman testified for the Paulines against her husband, despite the fact that she also spent a number of years in legal proceedings with them. In short, one should not lose sight of the fact that it is impossible to form an overall picture due to the lack of documents from that time. Therefore, it is sometimes difficult to discern why quite recent adverse parties left valuable objects for safekeeping with the Paulines or even bestowed gifts to the monastery church or to even claim that they did. The conflicts were most often caused by disputes over boundaries (or disregarding them), estates and milling. Problems with the inability to exercise their right to testamentary disposition have also compelled the Paulines to lodge complaints and initiate court proceedings. According to the Croatian historian Josip Adamček, estates and money were bestowed to the Paulines only by the old, feeble and dying, while all others took to litigation. Church historian Kamilo Dočkal claims that the Garić Paulines evil neighbors and were therefore often forced to settle the matters in court. However, the preserved documents contest the claims of both authors and show that the historical truth can be found somewhere in-between, that is that the monks of the Pauline monastery and their serfs were victims of different acts of violence, but were sometimes also rightly labeled as the perpetrators. Local nobility left their valuable objects to the Paulines for safekeeping because the monastery was considered to be a safe and reliable place. In some cases the transfer of valuable objects was not easily made. However, due to the fact that a list of the valuables kept was not preserved, it is likely that most transfers were done in a way that was satisfactory to both parties.