Time for another one of THOSE stories..... Most of you know that I don't have a romantic bone in my body. Had it amputated years ago - if I ever had one at all. Nope, we don't make a non-pragmatic decision on anything, although it seems that we might be a bit wrong on one of them.....Our thought has always been that an engagement ring was a superfluous purchase - a waste of cash, to be honest. Especially if the girls jets, then all that cash is gone, right? Not so, according to a recent court decision.... Meet John Gunther and Danielle Cavalieri. The two were engaged in March 2008, and they remained that way until October of the same year, when Gunther broke off the wedding. Cavalieri says he broke it off due to his seeing another woman, he says it was mutual. We could care less, what we're thinking about was who got the bling-bling. Why? It was a $19,000 ring !!!! Holy Smokey....
Well, Gunther asked for the ring back,which even we think is being an Indian Giver... and Cavalieri said no. So, Gunther filed suit in court. According to Supreme Court Judge F. Dana Winslow - a guy - no matter what the reason, Gunther is entitled to the ring back, because the ring is not a gift. It is 'property given in contemplation of a marriage which has not occured', and any breakup reason is irrelevant. In essence, an engagement ring is a very pricey carrot on the end of a fishing line, and until you are married, the fisherman (fiance') can reel in that line at any time, for any reason....
We're a bit torn on this ruling. We think it's pretty cheesy for a guy to expect the ring back, but we're glad as hell to find out that we can do it legally..... Armed with this new and exciting information, we plan on asking hot chicks to marry us on a daily basis, until we finally land a lunker, to use Bass Fishing lingo. Now, where should we start?
.
No comments:
Post a Comment