The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts has ruled that a woman must return her $70,000 Tiffany & Co. engagement ring after her fiancé canceled their wedding.
Found Messages on Phone
This decision ends a decades-long legal debate in Massachusetts over who keeps the engagement ring when a relationship ends.
In a legal battle that began in 2018, Bruce Johnson, a retired engineer, sought to retrieve the ring he had given to his former fiancée, Caroline Settino, after he called off their wedding, according to Digi24.
Johnson decided to end the engagement in 2017 after discovering messages on Settino’s phone, which led him to suspect she was having an affair. Settino has denied this, stating the messages were with a longtime friend.
No Take-Backs
The Massachusetts court’s recent ruling aligns with a modern trend, treating engagement rings as “conditional gifts” that must be returned if the marriage does not take place, regardless of who is at fault.
This overturns an older standard from 1959, which allowed ring return only if the recipient was responsible for the breakup.
Nicholas Rosenberg, Settino’s attorney, called the ruling “disappointing,” arguing that viewing engagement rings as conditional gifts reflects outdated ideas.
Rosenberg urged the court to consider a “no-take-backs” approach, as adopted by the Montana Supreme Court in 2002, but the Massachusetts court declined.
Justice Dalila Argaez Wendlandt stated that engagement rings are generally understood to be given in anticipation of marriage, making their return expected if the marriage is called off.
The case has attracted attention for its implications on property rights after a broken engagement. Engagement ring return cases are one of the last recognized forms of “breach of promise” litigation in the U.S., following the abolishment of “heart balm” lawsuits in most states in the 1930s.
