Can my ex fiance take legal action to get the engagement ring back?

[jpapadopulos]

I live in Washington and my ex has threatened to take legal action in order to get the ring back. Can he? Here is a little about my situation. We were together for nearly 9 years and he broke the egagement twice. It is finally over this time. He proposed to me on Valentines Day. Does this mean that the ring was a gift or is it considered a contractual gift? If it is a contractual gift, he broke off the engagement. Does that make him in breech of contract? I would apprecite any help I could get. Even if it is links to web sites that I would be able to research it on.
Thank You
Jenny

[brisgirl825]

Engagement rings are conditional gifts. The condition was not met therefore, the ring is not yours.
He has every right to take legal action.

[JETX]

Originally Posted by jpapadopulos

I live in Washington and my ex has threatened to take legal action in order to get the ring back. Can he?

Of course he can. Anyone can sue almost anyone else over almost anything.

Does this mean that the ring was a gift or is it considered a contractual gift? If it is a contractual gift, he broke off the engagement. Does that make him in breech of contract? I would apprecite any help I could get. Even if it is links to web sites that I would be able to research it on.

From a Washington attorney website:
Rodger admitted that it was he alone who called off his engagement to marry Janis, but he still wanted the return of the expensive engagement ring he had given her. When Janis refused, Rodger sued to get the ring back, and he won.

It was settled law in the state that any engagement gift, including a ring, is a conditional gift that must be returned if the condition is not fulfilled. Janis argued that her acceptance of Rodger's marriage proposal was the satisfied condition. The court ruled instead that the condition that must occur for the gift to hold up is the marriage itself.

Janis also argued that, even if the condition for the gift had not been met, a giver should have no right to a return of the gift when the giver breaks off the engagement. The court conceded that this has some superficial appeal to our sense of justice where one person truly has "wronged" the other. Of course, the rule would be unfair when the giver had compelling reasons to call off the engagement.

The court's greater concern, however, was that the ending of most "modern relationships" is rarely so cut and dried. Ascertaining who was "at fault" would "invite the parties to stage the most bitter and unpleasant accusations against those whom they nearly made their spouse." The process would also amount to opening a Pandora's box: Is a breakup justified by having nothing in common; dislike of prospective in-laws; a hostile minor child; incompatible pets; irritating habits; religious differences, etc.?

Rather than requiring courts to undertake the thorny task of finding fault, the court borrowed from the approach used in a no-fault divorce, some form of which exists in all 50 states. If, as in the case of Rodger and Janis, the marriage is called off, the giver of the engagement ring is entitled to its return, with no investigation into the motives or reasons for the breakup.
[url]http://www.dle-law.com/nofault.htm[/url]

[Batman]

It basically comes down to this. If he gave it to you solely as a contractual gift, meaning no special date (i.e. Birthday, christmas), then if the engagement does not lead to marrage, the contract is broken and the ring must be returned. If it was indeed a birthday gift or Christmas gift with an understanding of future marrage, then there is no court that would give the ring or it's value back to him. That's the law, or line in this case, saw it on Judge Judy. she's always right .

[JETX]

Originally Posted by Batman

It basically comes down to this. If he gave it to you solely as a contractual gift, meaning no special date (i.e. Birthday, christmas), then if the engagement does not lead to marrage, the contract is broken and the ring must be returned. If it was indeed a birthday gift or Christmas gift with an understanding of future marrage, then there is no court that would give the ring or it's value back to him. That's the law, or line in this case, saw it on Judge Judy. she's always right .

Wow!! What a wonderful, and useless, post.

[Zephyr]

Originally Posted by JETX

Wow!! What a wonderful, and useless, post.

wait- you didn't know Judge Judy rules the land?

[stealth2]

AND she's always right.

[JETX]

Originally Posted by Zephyr

wait- you didn't know Judge Judy rules the land?

Yep. And that 'Judge Judy' is really just an old FAMILY court judge.... and family courts are far from being 'civil law'.
Which explains her demeanor.... in Family Court, the judge has great leeway on how to rule and run her court... as the legislatures assume that the court will be run for the good of the family/children... and not strictly limited by the law.
Where a REAL (civil) court has precedent and rules. If she tried her shenanigans in REAL court...... the 'New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct' would have her out on her ass on the cold streets of NYC.

[BelizeBreeze]

Originally Posted by JETX

Yep. And that 'Judge Judy' is really just an old FAMILY court judge.... and family courts are far from being 'civil law'.
Which explains her demeanor.... in Family Court, the judge has great leeway on how to rule and run her court... as the legislatures assume that the court will be run for the good of the family/children... and not strictly limited by the law.
Where a REAL (civil) court has precedent and rules. If she tried her shenanigans in REAL court...... the 'New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct' would have her out on her ass on the cold streets of NYC.

But for her age......it's a cute ass

[JETX]

Originally Posted by BelizeBreeze

But for her age......it's a cute ass

You have clearly been on the farm for too long.... and need help NOW!!

Now, if you want to talk about good looking (and REAL) television judges, lets talk Judge Marilyn Milian:
[url]http://www.peoplescourt.net/[/url]

[BelizeBreeze]

Originally Posted by JETX

You have clearly been on the farm for too long.... and need help NOW!!

Now, if you want to talk about good looking (and REAL) television judges, lets talk Judge Marilyn Milian:
[url]http://www.peoplescourt.net/[/url]

The only problem with her is in my fantasy she comes in with leather and a whip and she KNOWS how to use them

[justalayman]

Originally Posted by BelizeBreeze

The only problem with her is in my fantasy she comes in with leather and a whip and she KNOWS how to use them

I figured the attorneys in here would be used to a judge doing things like that.

[JETX]

Originally Posted by justalayman

I figured the attorneys in here would be used to a judge doing things like that.

Never, EVER ask a male judge what is under his robe....
I have seen judges (in chambers) remove their robe and have on boxer shorts, bermuda shorts, sock garters, etc. Some might scary stuff!!!
One judge was wearing bermuda shorts and a gunbelt, holster and .45!!!! Looked like Patton waking up!!!

And don't even ask about judges attire when you wake them at 3:00 in the morning to try to get a search warrant signed!!!

[justalayman]

Originally Posted by JETX

Never, EVER ask a male judge what is under his robe....
I have seen judges (in chambers) remove their robe and have on boxer shorts, bermuda shorts, sock garters, etc. Some might scary stuff!!!
One judge was wearing bermuda shorts and a gunbelt, holster and .45!!!! Looked like Patton waking up!!!

And don't even ask about judges attire when you wake them at 3:00 in the morning to try to get a search warrant signed!!!

Leave it to you JETX. Now if I ever appear before a judge I'm not sure if I'll end up laughing or trembling due to the thoughts running through my head

[Zephyr]

Originally Posted by justalayman

Leave it to you JETX. Now if I ever appear before a judge I'm not sure if I'll end up laughing or trembling due to the thoughts running through my head

oooh that "giggle loop" is a dangerous thing