Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

An engagement ring was with the stipulation that she would marry me. She broke off the engagement. The ring was given with the promise of marriage, since the agreement or oral contract was broken, shouldn,t I be able to get the ring - she did break the agreement. Or would it fall under larceny by false promise?


Asked on 4/05/12, 10:50 am

4 Answers from Attorneys

It falls under "gift." It is extremely tacky for her to break the engagement and keep the ring, but it is not illegal.

Read more
Answered on 4/05/12, 11:09 am
Bryan Whipple Bryan R. R. Whipple, Attorney at Law

Rings aren't "Real Estate and Real Property," so you may not get as many answer under this heading as you would under some LawGuru topic dealing with personal property, However, I'll take a stab at it.

Looking at cases nationwide, I find that a majority of states take the view that a gift of an engagement ring is conditional, not absolute, and that if the donee breaks the engagement, the ring lawfully must be returned to the donor. A few, such as Montana, hold that the gift is absolute and complete at the time the ring is given, and allow the donee to keep it.

In California, the result is governed by statute. Civil Code section 1590 says "Where either party to a contemplated marriage in this State makes a gift of money or property to the other on the basis or assumption that the marriage will take place, in the event that the donee refuses to enter into the marriage as contemplated or that it is given up by mutual consent, the donor may recover such gift or such part of its value as may, under all of the circumstances of the case, be found by a court or jury to be just."

You should get the ring back under the Civil Code; it probably isn't false-promise larceny unless the prosecutor can prove that the lady knew at the time she accepted the ring that she wasn't going to go through with her promise to marry you.

Read more
Answered on 4/05/12, 11:51 am
Jeannette Darrow Jeannette C.C. Darrow, Attorney at Law

Great response, Mr. Whipple.

Read more
Answered on 4/05/12, 2:30 pm

I beg to differ with Mr. Whipple. Section 1590 does not, by itself, resolve the issue. The crucial point is "as may, under all the circumstances of the case, be found by a court or jury to be just." The cases in which property has been ordered returned following the break-up of an engagement have all either involved significant transfers of assets (such as putting real property in joint tenancy in contemplation of marriage), or a finding that the party that refused to go through with the marriage acted in bad faith and essentially never intended to go through with it. If the engagement breaks off for purely legitimate and personal reasons, and all that has been given is the ring, the chances of recovering the ring are pretty slim. Ultimately it will turn on the details of the break-up, and in any case it certainly is not theft.

Read more
Answered on 4/08/12, 2:24 pm


Related Questions & Answers

More Real Estate and Real Property questions and answers in California