The Atlanta Lawyer December 2017/January 2018 | Page 14

LEGAL MINUTE Harry and Meghan; That Ring and the Rules of Engagement Jessica Reece Fagan Hedgepeth, Heredia & Rieder [email protected] With the announcement that Prince Harry and American ac- tress Meghan Markle are planning a royal wedding, it seems engage- ment is on everyone’s mind. And what is more fun to discuss than the ring? Prince Harry designed a gorgeous sparkler incorporat- ing several diamonds from his late mother Diana’s collection and some new elements (placing the value between $350,000 and priceless). is satisfied, and the receiver can generally claim the gift free and clear of any claim by the giver. Should you do the same with your family heirlooms? As with so many wedding plans, that depends! Be- cause, if a love story does not end in a fairy tale, who does the en- gagement ring belong to? Conditional gift? Arguably, no. The recipient’s argument would go like this: “Love Bird #1 gave me a gift. I accepted the gift. I put it on my hand. It was only after the ring was accepted and on my hand that we discussed marriage. I thought we likely would get married, but that is not why I accepted the ring.” So, if this hypothetical relationship does not end in marriage, then Love Bird #2 has a legal argument that the ring was given uncondi- tionally. It is important at the outset to rec- ognize that there is a difference between what is legally correct and what is societally acceptable behavior. We will focus here what the legalities of a decision regard- ing an engagement ring may be under American matrimonial law, not what Emily Post or one’s own grandmother may say. In Georgia, as in most states, an engagement ring is considered a conditional gift. In other words, the gift is conditioned on an im- plied promise to get married. If a marriage occurs, the condition 14 December 2017 / January 2018 Consider this example: Love Bird #1 designs a bespoke ring and pres- ents it to Love Bird #2. Love Bird #1 hands the ring to Love Bird #2, who places it on the ring finger. A bit later, the couple is canoo- dling, and Love Bird #1 says, “We should plan a wedding!” Love Bird #2 agrees. But compare this second hypo- thetical: Love Bird #1 designs a bespoke ring and presents it to Love Bird #2 while asking, “Will you marry me?” The gorgeous ring sits in Love Bird #1’s hand expectantly while Love Bird #2 considers the proposal. “Yes, of course!” Then, Love Bird #1 places the ring on Love Bird #2’s finger. Conditional gift? Arguably, yes. If the relationship does not end in marriage, then Love Bird #2 would likely have to hand back over the ring because it was an engagement ring given on the con- dition that the relationship would end in marriage, which condition was not fulfilled. Does it matter who calls off the engagement? Not typically. Many states, including Georgia, South Carolina and New Jersey, follow a “no-fault” rule, meaning it does not matter which party ends the engagement. If it was a conditional gift and the condition is not met, the recipient must return the ring. Does it change anything if the ring incorporates a family diamond or other family heirloom? Again that phrase: “It depends.” On one hand, some courts have found that incorporating a family heirloom does not change the underlying question of whether the gift was conditional or unconditional. If it is given unconditionally, the ring can be kept by the gift receiver. If it was conditional, it should be returned. Other courts look at the facts more clearly to determine if there was another condition on the gift, a fact that actually makes