5 New Jersey Rules That Decide Who Keeps the Engagement Ring

A broken engagement hurts, and the ring can make it messier.

New Jersey courts have been asked to settle who keeps it, and the answer can reveal details people don’t expect.

Here’s how the courts have looked at it.

Note: This is general information, not legal advice. Court rulings and statutes are subject to change.

1. Conditional Gifts

An engagement ring is a conditional gift under the Aronow v. Silver ruling, and the condition is the wedding.

That decision came on November 17, 1987, from the Chancery Division of the Superior Court in Burlington County, a trial-level court.

The groom sued after the engagement ended, and the court held that the ring must be returned to him.

Among the older decisions the court discussed were Sloin v. Lavine from 1933 and Albanese v. Indelicato from 1947.

If you’re wearing an engagement ring, that ruling describes it as a gift with a condition attached.

If you’re the one who bought the ring, it’s a case where the buyer got it back.

2. Fault Doesn’t Count

Who ended the engagement didn’t decide who got the engagement ring in Aronow v. Silver.

Who called it off?

The bride did, with the wedding a few days away.

Who got the ring?

The groom, by the court’s order.

Why not look at blame?

The court rejected the older rule that asks who was to blame, reasoning that fault is impossible to pin down when two people call off a wedding.

The court said lawmakers recognized the same problem when they adopted the state’s no-fault divorce statute.

A December 2023 New Jersey Law Journal article by two attorneys says who broke off the engagement is irrelevant to the court.

New Jersey courts apply a no-fault approach, even when infidelity ended the engagement.

If you’re the one who called off the wedding, that is the bride’s side of Aronow v. Silver.

Under that ruling, either person can end an engagement without giving a reason.

3. Separate Property After the Wedding

An engagement ring stays separate property after the wedding, according to a 1990 Appellate Division ruling in Winer v. Winer.

The court said the ring is returnable only if the engagement is broken.

Once the couple married, the condition had been met.

Winer was a divorce case, and the ring came up as part of the property division.

The court held that the engagement ring wasn’t subject to equitable distribution, which means a divorce court doesn’t divide it between the spouses.

It said a ring given before the wedding keeps its character as separate property.

If you’re married, Winer v. Winer describes the ring as returnable only if the engagement is broken.

If you’re divorcing, that case is one where the ring stayed out of the property division.

4. Fraud Behind the Ring

An engagement ring obtained by fraud isn’t treated as a conditional gift and needn’t be returned, according to the same Law Journal article.

Fraud here is a false promise meant to trick someone into marrying in exchange for money, a vehicle or jewelry.

That puts the ring outside the usual rule that sends it back when the wedding doesn’t happen.

If you’re weighing a ring against this exception, the focus is how the ring was obtained, not who ended the engagement.

5. Already-Married Donors

An engagement ring isn’t treated as a conditional gift when the person giving it is already married, according to the same article.

That donor lacks the ability to contract at the time of the proposal.

The condition of marriage can’t be met in that situation.

If you were handed a ring by someone who was still married, it isn’t a conditional gift.

What You Can't Sue For

A suit over an engagement ring survives a 1935 heart balm statute, N.J.S.A. 2A:23-1, that ended damages lawsuits over broken engagements.

A heart balm law bars certain lawsuits over broken romances.

The statute abolished the right to sue for money damages over a breach of contract to marry, which is the legal name for a broken engagement.

You can't sue an ex for money just because a promise to marry you was broken.

In Aronow v. Silver, the court said the statute didn't block the groom's case because he was suing to recover conditional gifts, not to collect damages.

So the suit to get the ring back went forward, even though a suit over the broken promise couldn't.

That statute is more than 90 years old.

When a Ring's Purpose Is Unclear

An engagement ring isn't always treated as one when the evidence of its purpose is thin, as Gerard v. Distefano shows.

In that 1964 case, a husband asked a New Jersey court to order back a ring he gave the woman he married as an engagement ring.

In Gerard, the court found very little evidence that the ring was meant as an engagement ring.

It ruled the ring was a gift between living people, so it didn't have to go back.

If you gave a ring, Gerard is a case where the giver didn't get it back.

Death Before the Wedding

Your engagement ring doesn't need a breakup to land in front of a judge, as Goldstein v. Bello shows.

Death raises a harder question.

In that Law Division case, decided in October 2016, the court concluded the ring must be returned when the wedding doesn't happen, even if death is the reason.

A 2020 New Jersey Law Journal article reprinted by the law firm Pashman Stein Walder Hayden said no New Jersey appellate court had yet addressed that question.

Whether the rule holds when the person who gave the ring dies was still open.

Gifts Beyond the Ring

The engagement ring in Aronow v. Silver wasn't the only gift the groom got back.

The couple took title to a condominium in both names, and the groom made nearly all the payments.

The court ruled he was entitled to the condominium too, calling the conclusion that the purchase depended on the marriage inescapable.

If you and your fiancé put something big in both names, Aronow v. Silver shows a court asking whether it depended on the marriage.