Also known as: gift in contemplation of marriage · gifts made in contemplation of marriage · engagement gifts · conditional gifts
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
Conditional transfers of property given by one engaged person to the other in anticipation of a future marriage ceremony. Courts treat such gifts as subject to an implied condition that the ceremonial marriage actually occur. If the marriage does not take place, the donor may recover the property regardless of which party ended the engagement.
Gretchen Graham gave Gary Goldman an antique engagement ring and deeded him a rural parcel while they were engaged. She told him they would restore the land together once married. Gary sold timber rights on the parcel before the wedding. Gretchen canceled the engagement and sued to recover both items.
Giana Greco proposed to Guillermo Guzman with a diamond engagement ring during a private dinner. Guillermo later ended the engagement without marrying her. Giana sued to recover the ring, claiming it had been given only in anticipation of the wedding.
James B. Carroll and Alison E. Curry ended their romantic relationship in 2005 after Carroll proposed to Curry in late April 2000 and presented her with an engagement ring that he had purchased. Carroll moved into Curry's residence some months after the engagement. On November 16, 2005, Curry accused Carroll of infidelity and ordered him to leave her home, after which both parties considered the engagement terminated. Following the termination of the relationship, Carroll filed a two-count replevin action against Curry. Count I sought return of the engagement ring, and Count II sought other personal property including a plasma television and audio equipment. Carroll made no presuit demand for the ring. The trial court granted summary judgment to Carroll on count I on April 18, 2007. The trial court nonsuited count II with prejudice. The trial court denied Curry's motion to reconsider. Curry appealed the judgment as to count I. In her appeal, Curry contended that the trial court should have considered fault in the termination of the engagement and that a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding Carroll's alleged infidelity.
View caseThe donor must show that the item was given in contemplation of marriage and therefore subject to the condition that the ceremonial marriage take place. Courts examine the type of property, the donor's statements, and surrounding circumstances to determine whether the gift carried that implied condition. An engagement ring is treated as conditional by definition.
Supporting sources
Most jurisdictions allow the donor to recover the gifts regardless of which party ended the engagement. The condition that the marriage occur is the controlling factor, not the reason the engagement failed. Some older cases considered fault, but the modern approach focuses on the conditional nature of the transfer.
Supporting sources
Yes. Courts apply the same analysis to other property when the donor's words or the timing of the transfer show it was tied to the anticipated marriage. Statements linking the gift to the couple's future married life, such as calling it a wedding present, support treating the item as conditional.
Supporting sources
Courts weigh the donor's intent, any express conditions attached to the gift, the type of property, and the context of the transfer. Joint titling or statements treating the gift as permanent may support an unconditional characterization, but explicit wedding-related language usually prevails.