Fight over $70,000 engagement ring heads to Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

By Neal Riley

Click here for updates on this story

    BOSTON (WBZ) — A battle over who gets to keep a pricey engagement ring after breaking up has made it all the way to the highest court in Massachusetts.

The Supreme Judicial Court will soon hear arguments from lawyers representing Bruce Johnson and Caroline Settino. Johnson bought the engagement ring in question from Tiffany’s in Boston for more than $70,000 in 2017 and proposed to Settino at a golf club in Harwich.

The pair planned to marry the next year, but the relationship soon fell apart. Johnson claims that Settino was verbally abusive, treated him like a child and didn’t accompany him to appointments for cancer treatment.

According to court documents, the relationship ended when Johnson accused Settino of having an affair after reading a text message on her phone to a man that said, “My Bruce is going to be in Connecticut for three days. I need some playtime.”

Judge rules in favor of woman in engagement ring dispute

A key issue in the case is who is at fault in the breakup. Current Massachusetts law says an engagement ring is a “conditional gift” that the giver can get back if they are found to be “without fault” for the relationship’s demise.

A judge initially sided with Settino who said that the man she was texting was just a friend, and Johnson was mistaken in believing there was an affair. Therefore, the court ruled that Johnson “must bear the fault for the breakup of this engagement,” and awarded Settino the ring as well as tens of thousands of dollars for planned dental work that he had promised her.

Appeals court says man should get ring back

But Johnson was successful after taking the case to the Massachusetts Appeals Court. The appeals court ruled that it didn’t matter if an affair actually happened, Johnson still may have had good reason to end the engagement.

“Sometimes there simply is no fault to be had,” the court said in determining that Johnson should get the ring back.

The appeals court said the Supreme Judicial Court would have to consider whether Massachusetts should follow most other states in returning an engagement ring to the donor if a wedding is called off, regardless of who is at fault.

“The notion that women need to be protected and keep the engagement ring as an offset for damages or a consolation prize is sexist,” Johnson’s appeal argues.

Settino, meanwhile, says Massachusetts courts should move away from reviewing romantic relationships. She also said that Johnson gave her the receipt for the ring, implying that it was hers to keep.

The high court in Massachusetts will hear arguments in the case on Sept. 6.

Please note: This content carries a strict local market embargo. If you share the same market as the contributor of this article, you may not use it on any platform.