Engagement ring k/csd question Forum
-
- Posts: 98
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 1:05 am
Engagement ring k/csd question
So here's the situation. Couple gets engaged, girl gets expensive diamond ring. They sign a contract stating that if he breaks it off, he gets the ring back but she gets 5k. If she breaks it off, she gets nothing.
All I could find on westlaw was that the engagement ring is generally considered a conditional gift and the not happening of the condition is "no fault". I'm thinking that unless there was reliance on the 5k, that there is no K above because there is no consideration or mutuality of obligation (she doesn't do or forego anything, just collects). Am I missing anything?
All I could find on westlaw was that the engagement ring is generally considered a conditional gift and the not happening of the condition is "no fault". I'm thinking that unless there was reliance on the 5k, that there is no K above because there is no consideration or mutuality of obligation (she doesn't do or forego anything, just collects). Am I missing anything?
Last edited by BeaverHunter on Thu Dec 29, 2011 11:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 952
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 12:56 pm
Re: K/consideration hypothetical
it is december 29th.. school is not even in session.. go away!
-
- Posts: 98
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 1:05 am
Re: K/consideration hypothetical
Lowly 1L here, the guy in the hypothetical is a friend of mine, so this is a practical application. I think he's dumb, both for getting married and for making the "contract".
-
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 8:41 pm
Re: K/consideration hypothetical
If the guy breaks it off, he will argue that it is a conditional gift and a contract was not intended. Additionally, he would argue that the courts should not intefere with this type of contract, because of policy reasons. Imagine the "floodgates" that would occur if the courts had to waste their time with pre-marital contracts. The guy would cite cases where the courts have been reluctant to examine family cases.
If the guy broke it off, the girl will argue that this falls under the UCC since the ring is a good. Under the UCC, acceptance/offer is more lenient and can be made any manner...The ring could be considered "consideration." I guess there is other stuff you could argue. Of course, always argue both sides.
If the guy broke it off, the girl will argue that this falls under the UCC since the ring is a good. Under the UCC, acceptance/offer is more lenient and can be made any manner...The ring could be considered "consideration." I guess there is other stuff you could argue. Of course, always argue both sides.
-
- Posts: 98
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 1:05 am
Re: K/consideration hypothetical
Why on earth would he do that? He wouldn't want the K enforced because it was a conditional gift. If the K is enforceable he would owe 5k, unenforceable he gets the ring back and doesn't have to pay.sparty99 wrote:If the guy breaks it off, he will argue that it is a conditional gift and a contract was not intended. Additionally, he would argue that the courts should not intefere with this type of contract, because of policy reasons.
I'm not asking about whether a ring is a conditional gift, that seems well settled. I'm asking if a written k for payment if an engagement is broken has mutuality of obligation.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- Extension_Cord
- Posts: 592
- Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 3:15 pm
Re: K/consideration hypothetical
Just take the ring when shes sleeping then break it off. Dweeb.BeaverHunter wrote:Why on earth would he do that? He wouldn't want the K enforced because it was a conditional gift. If the K is enforceable he would owe 5k, unenforceable he gets the ring back and doesn't have to pay.sparty99 wrote:If the guy breaks it off, he will argue that it is a conditional gift and a contract was not intended. Additionally, he would argue that the courts should not intefere with this type of contract, because of policy reasons.
I'm not asking about whether a ring is a conditional gift, that seems well settled. I'm asking if a written k for payment if an engagement is broken has mutuality of obligation.
-
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 8:41 pm
Re: K/consideration hypothetical
BeaverHunter wrote:Why on earth would he do that? He wouldn't want the K enforced because it was a conditional gift. If the K is enforceable he would owe 5k, unenforceable he gets the ring back and doesn't have to pay.sparty99 wrote:If the guy breaks it off, he will argue that it is a conditional gift and a contract was not intended. Additionally, he would argue that the courts should not intefere with this type of contract, because of policy reasons.
I'm not asking about whether a ring is a conditional gift, that seems well settled. I'm asking if a written k for payment if an engagement is broken has mutuality of obligation.
Um, that is basically what I just said. Anyway, I'm over this topic. The guy is an idiot for making a contract out of an engagement ring and if he is not paying you for legal advice then you should not care either. Okay, thanks.
- NoleinNY
- Posts: 1031
- Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:58 pm
Re: Engagement ring k/csd question
FTFYBeaverHunter wrote:So here's the situation.Couple gets engaged, girl gets expensive diamond ring. They sign a contract stating that if he breaks it off, he gets the ring back but she gets 5k. If she breaks it off, she gets nothing.My friend is an idiot.
All I could find on westlaw was that the engagement ring is generally considered a conditional gift and the not happening of the condition is "no fault". I'm thinking that unless there was reliance on the 5k, that there is no K above because there is no consideration or mutuality of obligation (she doesn't do or forego anything, just collects). Am I missing anything?
- Veyron
- Posts: 3595
- Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 3:50 am
Re: Engagement ring k/csd question
Why would anyone make such a contract.
-
- Posts: 239
- Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 7:57 pm
Re: Engagement ring k/csd question
In New York, if the engagement is broken prior to the wedding, he gets the ring back, full stop. In some jurisdictions you don't. It just depends.
Parties can contract around the default rule if they'd like...
Parties can contract around the default rule if they'd like...
-
- Posts: 98
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 1:05 am
Re: K/consideration hypothetical
Oh, you're over it. Sorry to have bothered you then.sparty99 wrote:BeaverHunter wrote:Why on earth would he do that? He wouldn't want the K enforced because it was a conditional gift. If the K is enforceable he would owe 5k, unenforceable he gets the ring back and doesn't have to pay.sparty99 wrote:If the guy breaks it off, he will argue that it is a conditional gift and a contract was not intended. Additionally, he would argue that the courts should not intefere with this type of contract, because of policy reasons.
I'm not asking about whether a ring is a conditional gift, that seems well settled. I'm asking if a written k for payment if an engagement is broken has mutuality of obligation.
Um, that is basically what I just said. Anyway, I'm over this topic. The guy is an idiot for making a contract out of an engagement ring and if he is not paying you for legal advice then you should not care either. Okay, thanks.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login