Engagement Ring

Every few months a story pops up about a couple of decides not to get married and a demand made by the man requesting return of the engagement ring. Most states consider an engagement ring a conditional gift, meaning that if the marriage didn't happen, then the woman has to return the ring. In theory I agree with this legal argument, but I question whether fault should some how play into the return of the ring. For example, if the man is the cause of the demise of the relationship, does that still mean he should be entitled to the return of the ring? Is there no consolation prize for not marrying the wrong guy? I'm curious to know other people's thoughts on this subject. Should fault come into play when a legal determination is being made about who is entitled to the engagement ring?

Difference Between Fault and No Fault States

There are many differences between fault and no fault states when it comes to divorce. One of the major differences is that the reasons behind a parties' divorce in a no fault state are virtually irrelevant. When it comes to emotionally cruelty and the like, those issues are rarely ever a factor in equitable distribution, alimony and child custody issues in no fault states. However, in fault states, these factors come into play. See the following story regarding New Jersey's ex-governor to see how fault can come into play.

http://www.cfnews13.com/News/National/2008/3/20/gay_exgov_wins_round_in_divorce_court.html