Heiman v. Parrish
Supreme Court of Kansas
1DissentMarquardt, J.
I respectfully dissent from the majority’s holding.
The courts throughout our country seem to have difficulty in deciding which legal theory applies to ownership of an engagement ring when the engagement is broken. Is the engagement ring a gift or is it used as consideration for the promise to be engaged? If it is a gift, why is it not a completed gift? If it is a conditional gift, what makes it conditional? May a court infer a condition on a gift that was intended to be given and was delivered and accepted? If the ring is consideration for a contract, why not apply breach of contract rules?
“[W…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Herman v. GoetzSupreme Court of Kansas · 1969
- Douthitt v. ApplegateSupreme Court of Kansas · 1885
- Hansen v. WalkerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1953
- Bolen v. HumesOhio Court of Appeals · 1951
- Fooshee v. KasenbergSupreme Court of Kansas · 1940
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.