Who gets to keep a $70,000 engagement ring? Case goes before Massachusetts Supreme Court
BOSTON – When an engagement breaks down, who gets to keep the ring? A case deciding just that was argued before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Friday.
The state's highest court heard arguments from lawyers representing Bruce Johnson and Caroline Settino, who were briefly engaged in 2017.
According to court documents, Johnson bought the engagement ring from Tiffany's in Boston, paying more than $70,000.
Shortly after the pair became engaged, the relationship ended.
So who gets the engagement ring?
Massachusetts law considers an engagement ring a "conditional gift," saying the gift giver can get the ring back if they are found to be without fault in the relationship ending.
The question before the courts has been just that – who is at fault?
Johnson accused Settino of being verbally abusive and having an affair. He said in a court filing that he found a text message from Settino to a man that said, "My Bruce is going to be in Connecticut for three days. I need some playtime."
Woman wins the case, man wins the appeal
Settino argued that there was no affair - the man she texted was just a friend. A trial court judge ruled in her favor, saying Johnson was at fault for calling off the engagement and she gets to keep the ring,
Johnson appealed the decision and a Massachusetts Appeals Court ruled in his favor. The appeals court said the existence or non-existence of an affair was not the only factor in the case; Johnson may still have had solid reasons to call off the engagement.
"Sometimes there simply is no fault to be had," the court said.
The appeals court said the Supreme Judicial Court would have to consider whether Massachusetts should follow other states where engagement rings are returned to the giver if an engagement is called off, regardless of who is at fault.
Supreme Judicial Court arguments on engagement ring
Before the high court on Friday, Johnson's attorney, Stephanie Taverna Siden, not only requested justices reverse the trial court decision and award the ring back to him, but that they change Massachusetts law regarding how engagement rings are treated after a breakup.
When asked why returning the ring would be the most equitable, Taverna Siden said, "Because the person that has spent money or value on the ring is doing so under the condition that 'I'm proposing to you, we're going to get married and we're going to live a life together.' If you change the ring to a [between the living] gift, that person that gave the ring loses the value of the ring if the marriage doesn't happen."
Settino's attorney Nick Rosenberg argued against instituting a no-fault conditional gift, saying it requires the court "reading into a private act."
"We don't have conditional gifts in Massachusetts," said Rosenberg.
No word on when a ruling is expected.
