Breaking an engagement: where doth the ring go?

In My Humble Opinion
21

Oddly enough, I can answer this pretty definitavely, at least as to New York law. Several months ago, I represented a former fiance who went to trial for the return of the ring he gave his fiancee or its value.

My client won a judgment for the amount he originally paid for the ring, plus interest, or for the return of the ring. Return of the ring, however, was problematic, because she had sold it back to the jeweler for a lot less than he had originally paid.

New York Civil Rights Law Section 80-b provides:

In other words, certain gifts are considered “gifts in contemplation of marriage,” the classic example of which is an engagement ring. If the marriage does not occur, then the gift must be returned to the giver.

Her defense was that at the time the engagement broke up, he gave it to her as an outright gift. However, in order to demonstrate an outright gift, all of the elements of gift giving must be proved by “clear and convincing evidence.” The facts regarding what happened at the break-up of the engagement were unclear and disputed, to say the least.

Anyway, under New York law, a gift given in contemplation of marriage, such as an engagement ring or dowry, must be returned on the break-up of the engagement, regardless of which party, if one can be identified, broke up the engagement.

22

No. However, I would guess that unless you can demonstrate that it was lost through no fault of your own you would be liable to pay him for its value. If he sues you, I would start dredging, quick.

23

Boy, the next time auntie em and I get married, I think I’m just gonna give her a candy necklace as the bauble of betrothment. My inner-Air Supply (as she tells me) just doesn’t feel all gushy inside anymore when we start dissecting “The Return of the Ring”.

It’s not a movie I want to see.

Truth be told, if me and Seductive Susie see-sawed ourselves sensuously silly, I’d understand em’s desire to not give the ring back. Dude, I’ve been cheated on before (okay, it was in high school a few billion years back… but the pain, the pain!) so I know what it feels like–and I wasn’t even engaged to the woman. So, more than likely, I wouldn’t attempt to claim the ring as the spoils of a break-up.

Of course, if she and Paco partook in a Paphian play of provocative passion, I probably wouldn’t even call the engagment off. Heck, I’d probably use the guilt to have her fulfill every pedestrian, hetero-male fantasy out there. Lingerie, nighties, summer dresses… she’d have to go through 'em all. Just not, you know, all at once. :stuck_out_tongue:

And as auntie em stated in the OP, it’s not the law with which we are concerned in this thread (even if I did bring it up in my previous post), but the ethics. Devoid of emotions, I say give it back to me. But if I cheated? Give it back only if she’s allowed to inject it into my butt with a potato gun.

The potato would be optional. :eek:

24

Bildo, what if you can demonstrate that the gift wasn’t really in contemplation of marriage? For example, if you could show that game of hide the sausage actually predated the proposal and that the man had led his mistress to believe (whether or not he really meant it) that he wasn’t really going to marry his girlfriend/fiancee? Does “in the contemplation of marriage” have to exisit in the eyes of the giver or of the reciever?

25

My mom always told me that I should never feel that I need to give anything back that a boyfriend gave me, so according to her and consequently me, I would say keep it.
Unless of course you feel really guilty about keeping it or you just don’t want it around, the former feeling would dictate giving it back, the latter, either selling it or giving it back.

26

Well, as a legal matter, it’s a question of factual proof. In court, the person who wanted to get the gift back would have to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that it was in contemplation of marriage. What would matter was the issue of the objective facts surrounding the gift.

In the case I dealt with, it was a diamond ring given on the beach in Hawaii while my client asked “will you marry me?” It ain’t too hard to see that the ring was a gift in contemplation of marriage. That’s why she had to try to prove later that it was an outright gift. In addition, my client had given her a number of other expensive gifts that he was not seeking the return of.

I would say that if an engagement ring is given between two people who are not under any impediment to marry, it would almost certainly be considered a gift in contemplation of marriage. That one or the other had doubts or was cheating or any other subjective issues shouldn’t change the fact that the ring was given as an engagement ring (if an insincere one) and should go back, unless the receipient can prove that the giver never had any intention to marry.

It can get a little more interesting if one of the parties is married at the time of the “engagement.” I haven’t looked at this in any detail, but I’ve seen reports where the mistress has been allowed to keep the “engagement ring” given to her by a married man, because it couldn’t have been in contemplation of marriage because the giver was then legally prohibited from marrying the reciepient.

Something that other people have mentioned above is the idea that a gift on Christmas or some other day gifts are commonly given need not be returned. This has a germ of truth, but is incorrect. The question is an objective one as to whether the gift was given in contemplation of marriage. The fact that gifts are commonly given on Christmas (or whenever) is a fact that can cut against it being an engagement gift, but it does not answer the question. If you put a ring under the Christmas tree, and when your girlfriend opens it you get down on one knee and ask her to marry you, that would almost certainly be considered a gift in contemplation of marriage.

In court, the question would be an objective balancing of the facts. An engagement ring will almost always be considered a gift in contemplation of marriage. Other gifts given without an express connection to an offer of marriage would be more difficult to show as having been given in contemplation of marriage.

27

See, I’m all for reading at the table no matter who’s dining with you. Or a lack of “who” if you’re all alone. Sometimes you just don’t want to put a good novel down.

28

My former fiance said I was to keep the ring when he left California—it was a ‘gift’. I saw it as a symbol of a promise that was broken but he wouldn’t take it back. When I fell in love with Drachillix I mailed it to his Colorado office.

29

I gave it back - but I broke up with him. He didn’t want to take it, but he was very very broke. (Apparantly he didn’t sell it. Silly man.)

30

I’ve seen a coupla episodes of Judge Judy (lol how sad am I?) where this was dicussed… in each case, it went back to the person who purchased it, namely the guy.

No idea if thats the correct legal position… but hey, if Judge Judy says it, it cant be wrong (can it?) :smiley:

31

My first stop after breaking up with the ex was the pawn shop. (This was about, jeez…10 years ago…) But, in light of the fact that I had to use the money to pay doctor bills that he should have been responsible for, I don’t feel bad. I just wanted away from him.

On the other hand, I think if you’re engaged and either one of you break it off, the ring goes back to the guy. I think about it this way: giving it back cuts off one last tie to someone who you may not want to see for a long time. Why torture yourself by keeping something that you can get rid of? (And it works both ways; if you dump him, obviously you may not want reminders of him, and if he dumps you, why would you want to keep anything that jerk gave you?) :smiley:

32

In Ontario (ymmv), the person who breaks off the engagement neither keeps nor is returned the ring. Where each accuses the other of breaking the engagement, the court looks at the circumstances.

33

I’ve seen some older New York case law that attempted to examine who broke the engagement (or sometimes whose fault the broken engagement is). It could get interesting and ugly when the one person broke the engagement because of things the other did (e.g. if she broke the engagement because he lied or cheated).

The section of the New York Civil Rights Law that I cited above is part of the 1935 enactment that prohibited the “heart balm” claims of alienation of affections, criminal conversation, seduction and breach of contract to marry. (The link I posted is to the whole article.)

Modern decisions recognize that where an engagement is broken, that it is almost always the result of mutual incompatablity or fault and mistakes on both sides. The search for who is responsible for the broken engagement is a fruitless exercise, so the ring simply goes back to the giver.

34

There was a precedent on Judge Judy. The couple in question did not get married, they got engaged, and then split up. The girl had to give back the ring.

35

[Grumpy ol’ bear mode] Wow! So many vindictive, greedy wenches I haven’t been involved with! :wink: Where’d I leave that flameproof suit? [/Grumpy ol’ bear mode]

IIRC, the engagement ring derives from the old custom of paying a “bride price”. So, when you accept the ring, you’re essentially entering into a business transaction, and you are the goods being sold. (Romantic, ain’t it? Just makes me feel all warm and fuzzy…wait…I’m always warm and fuzzy…I’m a bear!) This means that, if the goods aren’t delivered, the ring should definitely go back to the man. (Assuming, again, that it was not a combined birthday/Xmas/whatever present.)

Aside from that, why would you want to keep it? It can’t be worth all the bad karma you’d bring on yourself for being like that. Even my skanky ho’ of a first wife offered the ring back, when we almost broke up. (I really wish I’d taken it, but that’s another story.) I understand anger, believe me. But, spite hurts you more than the target. It may inconveniece the victim, temporarily, but it permanently damages the perpetrator.

It would be interesting, from a sociological perspective, to know the ages of the ladies that have responded. My suspicion is that, the younger they are, the more likely they are to feel “entitled” to keep the ring. Entitlement seems to be ingrained in the younger generations.

Well, I agree; someone’s dead wrong about this. If Ms. Manners says reading at the table is verboten, I’d say it’s she that’s wrong. As a former traveling salesman, I can tell you it’s far more uncomfortable, for both the traveler and his fellow restaurant patrons, to have some poor schlub trying desperately to avoid appearing to eavesdrop on the other diners, without being forced to stare at his plate the whole time, than it is for him to simply bring a book to the table. That’s my three cents (including tip).

36

If you break it off, you give the ring back.

If he breaks it off, you give it back by throwing it at him with great force, or giving it to him at the bottom of a box of poop, or dropping it in the mud at his feet and making him dig for it.

37

Start with a jurisdiction where fault decides who gets the ring, then add into the mix:

“Karen McArthur and Peter Zaduk are both intense, highly driven successful criminal defence counsel . . . .”

Include criminal charges and questions such as whether or not there was an agreement for an open relationship, and you can guess the rest.

McArthur v. Zaduk, [2001] O.J. No. 2284, Court File No. 00-FA-9313FIS, (Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Mesbur J.).
Some folks just ain’t meant to be together.

38

You do this too? I often partake of newspapers (SF Chronicle) or magazines (The Economist) while I’m waiting for my food. Once I get it though, I stop reading and dig in.

39

Toss in an additional factor:

Engagement rings often have sentimental value that goes beyond the cost to the purchaser. I.e., many engagement rings tend to be family heirlooms: a mother or grandmother’s hand-me-down.

Beyond THAT factor, the ring can be thought of, socially, as a symbolic “piece” of the person himself, held in trust until the wedding. Hence, there’s an overall expectation that the marriage come to fruition before the ring permanently becomes hers. In other words, the ring goes back.

I’d like to ask: why does the bride-to-be need to keep the ring? I realize that financial gain or even revenge might be a fun motive (not that I’m accusing anyone here of that), but what’s the value to the dumpee beyond that? Sentiment? The guy just broke up with you–how could there be any positive memories attached to it? Fashion? I find it perplexing that somebody would wear an engagement ring when there’s no actual engagement (George Costanza notwithstanding).

No, seriously. I just bought an engagement ring last week, and while neither of us are planning a breakup, my curiosity is piqued.

40

He broke it off. I didn’t want to look at it again, even though I LOVED that ring, so I left it on his coffee table. When I went back a couple of days later to get the last of my things, I looked to see if it was still there, and it wasn’t. If it had been I think I’d have taken it, probably to sell. Or maybe to throw in the river!

Monetary considerations had nothing to do with it. The relationship was over, and I didn’t want the ring as a reminder. It’s bad enough that I found some earrings he gave me after I moved – I thought they’d vanished inbetween states – and the last thing I’d want is to look at the ring.