Did the ring have any magic powers like the Green Lantern's ring? Did Tolkein write a trilogy about it?
If the answer is "no" to the above, then let it go and chalk it up as part of the cost of doing business.
Did the ring have any magic powers like the Green Lantern's ring? Did Tolkein write a trilogy about it?
If the answer is "no" to the above, then let it go and chalk it up as part of the cost of doing business.
Unless the ring has great value, either monetarily or as a family heirloom, I'd recommend letting it go.
In Florida, the engagement ring belongs to the giver until the marriage takes place.
The value of the ring would determine whether or not this is worth it.
But truthfully- a used ring is not worth much, so it better be a heck of a ring to be worth going after.
I'd leave principle behind if it isn't worth your time.
Move on and consider it a lesson learned.
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
I will echo what everyone before me has said and say you should tell the story.
Am I wrong on this, or do women ALWAYS want to keep the ring?
Cincinnati Reds: Farm System Champions 2022
I took Business Law this semester at college, and this was one of the case studies. A guy bought an engagement ring and eventually called off the engagement and he asked for the ring back. She refused and he took her to court.
Some states follow a fault rule:
Groom breaks it off, she keeps the ring.
Bride breaks it off, groom gets the ring back.
Other states follow the objective rule, in which the bride must return the ring regardless.
Here is how the case turned out:
http://www.macelree.com/resources/home_proposals.html
It depends on the state, but if I were you, unless it was a family heirloom that had sentimental value, I would let it go and move on.A Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision says that engagement rings are given conditionally, and must be returned in lieu of a marriage event
Today, engagement rings can run from hundreds of dollars to a hundred thousand dollars. So, when an engaged couple fails to make it down the aisle, which party keeps the ring? A landmark Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling has decreed that an engagement ring is a gift "conditioned" on the marriage event. Hence, if the marriage is cancelled by either party, the ring must be returned to the purchaser.
The Case
The case that set the precedent in Pennsylvania was Lindh v. Surman. In August of 1993, Rodger Lindh, a divorced middle–aged man, proposed to Janis Surman, a younger woman who had never been married. Rodger presented Janis with a diamond engagement ring that he purchased for $17,400. Rodger indicated that the actual value of the ring was $21,200 and that he got a special deal because he was a "good customer," having bought his ex–wife's ring and various pieces of jewelry for his children from the jeweler.
When problems arose between the couple later that year, Rodger broke off the engagement and asked Janis to return the ring. Janis obliged. Later, the two reconciled and Rodger proposed again, giving back to Janis the same ring. For a second time, Janis accepted. In March of 1994, however, Rodger called off the engagement again and demanded the return of the ring. This time Janis refused, and litigation ensued.
Arbitration and Lower Court Rulings
In the litigation, a panel of arbitrators ruled that Janis could keep the ring. A judge of the Court of Common Pleas held otherwise, awarding Rodger a judgment of $21,200. The Pennsylvania Superior Court upheld the Trial Court's decision.
Pennsylvania Supreme Court Ruling
In arguing the case before the Supreme Court, the parties agreed that the engagement ring was a conditional gift. However, they disagreed on two points: (1) what was the condition of the gift (acceptance of the engagement or the marriage itself); and (2) whether fault was relevant to determining the return of the ring. Ultimately, the Supreme Court held for Rodger on both points.
The court found that the gift was conditioned on the actual marriage, not just acceptance of the engagement. The Supreme Court further determined that a fault analysis (a determination of who was responsible for breaking off the engagement) was not appropriate. Pennsylvania, like most states, has adopted a "no fault" system in divorce cases (a divorce can be obtained without proving fault by either party). The Court indicated that such a "no fault" system would be appropriate in an engagement ring case because of the difficulty of determining who was "wrong" or "right" in the breakup of the engagement. To determine who was at "fault" would require a detailed inquiry into the facts surrounding the demise of the relationship.
Rather than burdening the lower courts with such unpleasant disputes, the Supreme Court adopted a "no fault" system in which the husband–to–be is entitled to return of the ring even if he breaks off the engagement. Therefore, in this case, Janis was forced to either return the ring or pay Rodger $21,200
Legally, I have no clue, but the custom usually goes as follows:
If you broke up with her, she gets to keep everything you gave her. If she broke up with you, then she has to give the gifts back.
If this is the custom she's trying to stick to, my best advice is to get back with her and be such a terrible boyfriend that she has no choice but to dump you.
Its hers from all the stories I have heard.
I got mine back from my ex. I tried to sell it for about a year, but no luck. I still have it for sale.
I just wanted it back because she broke it off.
I couldn't be happier about it now.
"My mission is to be the ray of hope, the guy who stands out there on that beautiful field and owns up to his mistakes and lets people know it's never completely hopeless, no matter how bad it seems at the time. I have a platform and a message, and now I go to bed at night, sober and happy, praying I can be a good messenger." -Josh Hamilton
Short-term, the ring could be used for money that could be needed.
Long-term, it could be a mental picture you will be flashbacking on for years to come to the point where it will drive you bananas.
To edit a quote from the famous British philosopher, Sir Paul McCartney - Just Live and Let (it) Die
Some people play baseball. Baseball plays Jay Bruce.
In past relationships I've been in, I've given gifts that were of more-than-a-little value, some getting up in the many $100's of dollars. But I can't say I ever wanted anything back.
At the time of the giving, it was done in great sincerity and (possible) love. I'd give it a lot of thought to make sure it was a gift that I thought that person would like, i.e. it was customized for them and not me. I never expected it to come back nor did I really want it back if the relationship died.
If it were an engagement ring (which its not), I can see the expectation of getting it returned. But otherwise, it's a gift like you give to friends, family, lovers, etc etc. Expecting it back because the relationship went south off isn't part of the game IMO. Getting pissy about it can only make everyone look bad.
She used to wake me up with coffee ever morning
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |