No marriage and no money back for snubbed fiance

Published June 25, 2007 2:06 am
This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2007, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

A jilted fiance can't recover the money he spent on an engagement ring or for his vasectomy, the Utah Court of Appeals ruled last week.

The couple dated for three months before getting engaged in July 2004 and prepared for a November wedding. The nuptials were postponed twice, and in late April 2005, the woman broke off the engagement "without any forewarning or explanation," according to the court's opinion.

The woman returned her engagement ring, but in November 2005 the former groom-to-be filed a lawsuit seeking compensation for numerous purchases made while the couple were together, said the opinion. He argued that had it not been for the wedding he would not have purchased an engagement ring, financed an Alaskan cruise and a trip to France, or spent $2,400 to help the woman's son purchase a vehicle.

The appeals court dismissed the man's case, writing that he had failed to prove that the gifts had been conditioned upon the marriage taking place.

- Nathan C. Gonzalez

Reader comments on sltrib.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Salt Lake Tribune. We will delete comments containing obscenities, personal attacks and inappropriate or offensive remarks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. If you see an objectionable comment, please alert us by clicking the arrow on the upper right side of the comment and selecting "Flag comment as inappropriate". If you've recently registered with Disqus or aren't seeing your comments immediately, you may need to verify your email address. To do so, visit disqus.com/account.
See more about comments here.
comments powered by Disqus