If you have questions about divorce, legal separation, alimony pendente lite, or alimony in Connecticut, please feel free to call the experienced divorce attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport today at 203-221-3100 or email Joseph C. Maya, Esq. at JMaya@Mayalaw.com.

The court adopted a “no-fault” approach, and found that the plaintiff was entitled to have the engagement ring he gave to the defendant returned when the engagement was broken.

The parties began dating around March of 2004. The defendant was 34 years old, and considerably younger than the plaintiff, who had falsified his age to her. The parties became engaged in November of 2004. The parties were to be married on May 27, 2005. After the defendant refused to sign a prenuptial agreement, the plaintiff called off the wedding. Courts generally agree that an engagement ring is a conditional gift pending the marriage of the two parties. Traditionally, court would determine fault for the condition’s failure to manifest when determining whether the ring should be returned to the owner.

In the case at hand, the court discussed several recent decisions by court that adopted a “no fault” approach to designating ownership of an engagement ring when such relationship is called off. The court found that to penalize the owner for taking steps to avoid an unhappy marriage goes against public policy. Therefore, the plaintiff was entitled to have the ring returned to him, even though he called off the wedding.

For a free consultation, please do not hesitate to call the experienced family law and divorce attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport, CT at 203-221-3100. We may also be reached for inquiries by email at JMaya@mayalaw.com.

Source: Thorndike v. Demirs, 2007 Conn. Super. LEXIS 1944 (July 26, 2007).