James Cohen was quoted in a Staten Island Advance article where he weighs in on a case involving an engagement ring.
Love’s lost, and there’s a cost – a $45,000 engagement ring.
A Staten Island justice has ordered a Manhattan woman to return the pricey ring her ex-fiance, a Graniteville resident, gave her in anticipation of their betrothal before they later parted ways, or else fork over the cash.
…
James A. Cohen, a Fordham University Law School professor, has told the Advance an engagement ring is “very, very symbolic and for a special purpose” and establishes an implicit contract between the parties.
If the woman breaks off the engagement, she’s not entitled to keep the ring, Cohen opined. He said he believed a groom-to-be might even have a case if he terminated the engagement.
On the other hand, the professor said, a would-be groom would probably be out of luck if he tried to reclaim a $15,000 necklace or other gift given as a birthday present or unconditional token of his affection.
In such instances, there’s no implied contract, said Cohen.