(CLO) The Massachusetts Supreme Court (USA) has ruled that a failed bride must return her $70,000 engagement ring (more than 1.77 billion VND) to her ex-fiancé.
The Massachusetts Supreme Court has sided with Bruce Johnson in his years-long legal battle with his ex-girlfriend Caroline Settino. Johnson is demanding the return of his expensive engagement ring after the marriage was called off.
A $70,000 Tiffany & Co engagement ring is at the center of a legal battle at the Massachusetts Supreme Court in Boston, Massachusetts, US. Photo: Reuters
A court has issued a final ruling, forcing Caroline Settino to return her engagement ring to Bruce Johnson, ending a years-long dispute over ownership of personal property after the relationship ended.
In the court’s decision, they updated their approach to engagement ring cases to reflect current legal trends. Specifically, the court recognized that an engagement ring is considered a gift that can be reclaimed in the event of a broken marriage.
Caroline Settino's lawyer said the ruling was "disappointing" and that "viewing an engagement ring as a gift that can be retrieved is an outdated concept".
In the past, when a promise of marriage was broken, a woman could sue her ex-lover for “injury.” However, in the 1930s, states began to abolish this type of claim. And today, lawsuits to get back an engagement ring are one of the only remaining types of annulment lawsuits that U.S. courts recognize.
Most states initially adopted a 1959 Massachusetts court ruling that gave the engagement ring giver the right to reclaim it if they were not the direct cause of the annulment.
In 2017, Johnson and Settino's marriage fell apart when he discovered suspicious text messages on his fiancée's phone, and suspected she was having an affair. However, Settino denied the allegations, explaining that the man was just a longtime friend of hers.
In 2018, Johnson sued his would-be wife to get back her $70,000 engagement ring. The trial court, however, found that Johnson was mistaken about the affair and was responsible for the breakup. But the appeals court reversed the ruling, leading to an appeal to the state supreme court.
Judge Dalila Argaez Wendlandt took the widely held view that an engagement ring is a gift specifically intended for marriage, so the recipient must return it if they do not marry.
Ha Trang (according to Reuters)
Source: https://www.congluan.vn/co-dau-hut-phai-tra-lai-nhan-dinh-hon-tri-gia-70000-usd-sau-vu-kien-post320938.html
Comment (0)