Which party is at fault for a broken engagement should no longer govern how Massachusetts courts handle disputes over who gets to keep the ring, the state’s high court held Friday.
“Courts have identified the inherent difficulties in assigning responsibility for a prenuptial breakup,” Justice Dalila Argaez Wendlandt wrote. “Assigning blame to one who breaks an engagement is at odds with a principal purpose of the engagement period to allow a couple time to test the permanency of their wish to marry.”
The ruling overturns decades of precedent about engagement gifts. The new holding stems from a lawsuit Bruce Johnson brought against his ex-fiancée, Caroline Settino, after their engagement ended. He accused her of having an affair and sought possession of the $70,000 engagement ring and $3,700 wedding bands he purchased.
Massachusetts courts previously held an ex-fiancé could get their ring back after a failed engagement only if they were “without fault.” The Supreme Judicial Court will “now join the modern trend adopted by the majority of jurisdictions that have considered the issue and retire the concept of fault in this context,” the opinion said.
A lower court found Johnson responsible for making the choice to end their engagement based on a mistaken belief that his fiancée was cheating on him, so he couldn’t get the ring back.
The Supreme Judicial Court reversed that holding.
Siden & Associates PC represents Johnson. Gardner & Rosenberg PC represents Settino.
The case is Johnson v Settino, Mass., No. SJC-13555, 11/8/24.
To contact the reporter on this story:
To contact the editor responsible for this story:
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.