can i get my ring back?

[schwekye]

What is the name of your state? new york

Story goes as follows:
My son was engaged to be married. To make long story short...he broke it off.
All gifts were returned to their original givers except the enagagement ring. The girl kept the ring and refuses to return it.
She claims she sold it to pay for lost deposits and other expenses.
Can my son sue her for the return of the ring in New York?
Does it matter that she or I should say her parents lost their deposits?
Must she return the ring despite this claim?
I also put on a huge engagement party. Can i sue her for these expenses? I think not.
But i do want the ring returned to my son.
Should i pursue in court? Do i have a good chance of getting it back in court.
Thanks for your help.
I appreciate all worthwhile replies.
Eddie

 

[seniorjudge]

No, YOU do not have a case because you are not a party to this squabble.

Neither does your son.

A gift once given cannot be taken back just because the giver has a change of heart.

 

[Happy Trails]

New York considers it a "conditional gift" given in contemplation of marriage.

http://slate.msn.com/id/100411

http://www.suntimes.com/output/lifestyles/cst-ftr-ring14.html

http://www.nolo.com/article.cfm/objectID/E2120B2B-1C65-4E77-92A0ADC4FA3EDC2A/118/304/192/ART/

http://www.columbia.edu/itc/tc/bolotin/resourcecenter/resources/mlt/return.html

 

[You Are Guilty]

New York considers it a "conditional gift" given in contemplation of marriage.

http://slate.msn.com/id/100411

http://www.suntimes.com/output/lifestyles/cst-ftr-ring14.html

http://www.nolo.com/article.cfm/objectID/E2120B2B-1C65-4E77-92A0ADC4FA3EDC2A/118/304/192/ART/

http://www.columbia.edu/itc/tc/bolotin/resourcecenter/resources/mlt/return.html

True, but you could have saved a lot of time and just cited the statute.

80-b. Nothing in this article contained shall be construed to bar a
right of action for the recovery of a chattel, the return of money or
securities, or the value thereof at the time of such transfer, or the
rescission of a deed to real property when the sole consideration for
the transfer of the chattel, money or securities or real property was a
contemplated marriage which has not occurred, and the court may, if in
its discretion justice so requires, (1) award the defendant a lien upon
the chattel, securities or real property for monies expended in
connection therewith or improvements made thereto, (2) deny judgment for
the recovery of the chattel or securities or for rescission of the deed
and award money damages in lieu thereof.

 

[Happy Trails]

True, but you could have saved a lot of time and just cited the statute.

I know, but I just found the articles interesting.

Be nice!