Groom To Be Cancelled Engagement/Wedding

[Jilted_Bride]

Missouri, St. Louis County

Bride To Be looking for advice on recovering wedding planning expenses.

 

[cyjeff]

You may need to give us just a bit more information.

Historically, these cases are notoriously difficult to collect.

 

[Antigone*]

Missouri, St. Louis County

Bride To Be looking for advice on recovering wedding planning expenses.

Did bride-no-longer-to-be give back the ring?

 

[mistoffolees]

Did bride-no-longer-to-be give back the ring?

I think we need to reserve judgment until we know the facts, particularly the reason for the breakup.

If, as OP claims, groom broke off the engagement, then bride is entitled to keep the ring in most states, although there are some where it must be returned to the buyer regardless of who broke off the engagement. I'll have to do some more research to see which one applies in MO.

ETA: A Missouri attorney is pretty wishy-washy on the subject of the ring, so it is not clear what would happen in MO.
http://familylaw.mwortmanlaw.com/2006/03/family-law/marriage-and-living-together/marriage/when-does-an-engagement-ring-have-to-be-returned/

It look like Missouri case law is equally divided:
http://www.foxfamilylawyers.com/fox-family-file-detail.asp?id=278

Whether bride has any right to recover any of the wedding expenses will also depend on circumstances, but as Unca Jeffy says, it's very difficult in most cases.

I haven't found case law. I found one mediation example where the couple agreed to split the expenses:
http://www.mediate.com/articles/blame.cfm
Similarly, this one was settled out of court:
http://abovethelaw.com/2011/09/an-update-on-chicagos-runaway-bridegroom-and-jilted-bride/#more-94767

General background for various states - which probably won't help OP, but is interesting:
http://www.isba.org/sections/familylaw/newsletter/2011/06/brokenengagements

The most generic information is a summary from the Yale Law Journal. While it doesn't specify Missouri, it states that the standard practice is pretty clear:
http://www.tushnet.com/law/rules.html

While a man can, in many states, regain his ring whenever an engagement ends, a woman cannot recover expenses for a wedding she has painstakingly arranged; not only may she be abandoned at the altar in front of friends and family, she (and her family) will have to pay for the costs of the nonexistent celebration. Lawsuits for recovery of expenses not directed to the defendant, but made in preparation for marriage (for example, travel to a fiance's residence or a wedding dress), though simple to measure in monetary terms, have generally been held to be prohibited by antiheartbalm laws.

OP may find the rest of that article to be interesting.

Overall, the consensus seems to be that the bride-to-be does not have grounds to recover wedding expenses. After all, if the wedding had gone through and they got divorced the next day, the bride traditionally bears the expense of the wedding. Thus, it's going to be very difficult for OP to recover any money for wedding expenses - yet she MIGHT have to return the ring, depending on the particular judge involved.

 

[Antigone*]

I think we need to reserve judgment until we know the facts, particularly the reason for the breakup.

If, as OP claims, groom broke off the engagement, then bride is entitled to keep the ring in most states, although there are some where it must be returned to the buyer regardless of who broke off the engagement. I'll have to do some more research to see which one applies in MO.

Whether bride has any right to recover any of the wedding expenses will also depend on circumstances, but as Unca Jeffy says, it's very difficult in most cases.

No judgement, Misto, just asking a question. Heck for all we know the groom-no-longer-to-be called off the wedding because something of something-the-bride-no-longer-to-be did. So in addition to Unka Jeffy's request for more information I wanted to know about the ring.

 

[mistoffolees]

No judgement, Misto, just asking a question. Heck for all we know the groom-no-longer-to-be called off the wedding because something of something-the-bride-no-longer-to-be did. So in addition to Unka Jeffy's request for more information I wanted to know about the ring.

No problem. Unfortunately, in MO, there's no clear answer about the ring - even if we did know exactly what happened. Both sources I found said that the disposition of the ring depends on the judge in the case. There is case law going both ways.

 

[Bali Hai]

No problem. Unfortunately, in MO, there's no clear answer about the ring - even if we did know exactly what happened. Both sources I found said that the disposition of the ring depends on the judge in the case. There is case law going both ways.

Uncle misto, did you delete my post in this thread?

 

[mistoffolees]

Uncle misto, did you delete my post in this thread?

Nope. I don't have the ability to delete posts. Someone (not me) probably reported it to the admin.

 

[stealth2]

At the end of the day? Better before than after. Then there would be wedding AND divorce expenses!

 

[Mass_Shyster]

Unless there is a written contract, jilted bride has no recourse.

Missouri Revised Statutes
Chapter 432
Contracts Required to Be in Writing
Section 432.010

August 28, 2011


Statute of frauds--contracts to be in writing.

432.010. No action shall be brought to charge any executor or administrator, upon any special promise to answer for any debt or damages out of his own estate, or to charge any person upon any special promise to answer for the debt, default or miscarriage of another person, or to charge any person upon any agreement made in consideration of marriage, or upon any contract made for the sale of lands, tenements, hereditaments, or an interest in or concerning them, or any lease thereof, for a longer time than one year, or upon any agreement that is not to be performed within one year from the making thereof, unless the agreement upon which the action shall be brought, or some memorandum or note thereof, shall be in writing and signed by the party to be charged therewith, or some other person by him thereto lawfully authorized, and no contract for the sale of lands made by an agent shall be binding upon the principal, unless such agent is authorized in writing to make said contract.

 

[Jilted_Bride]

More information...

Dec 25th at 1220pm - 'I love you', 1130pm 'We are not compatable'
Yes, it happened that quickly...no warning, no signs

 

[Silverplum]

More information...

Dec 25th at 1220pm - 'I love you', 1130pm 'We are not compatable'
Yes, it happened that quickly...no warning, no signs

You don't have a written contract such as described in Stevef's post, do you?

 

[Antigone*]

More information...

Dec 25th at 1220pm - 'I love you', 1130pm 'We are not compatable'
Yes, it happened that quickly...no warning, no signs

Sorry, Jilted. It is truly much better this way than a messy divorce later on.

 

[Bali Hai]

Nope. I don't have the ability to delete posts. Someone (not me) probably reported it to the admin.

Do all reported posts get deleted, or just mine?

 

[Antigone*]

Do all reported posts get deleted, or just mine?

I don't remember what you said Bali, but obviously if it did not get put back in the thread, M was not too happy about it.

Forget about it already.