Legal Opinion · Dissent

Lowe v. Quinn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided June 24, 1969Published

1Dissent

Tilzer, J. (dissenting).

I agree with the majority that section 80-b of the Civil Rights Law did not create a new cause of action, but only removed from the ban of the anti-heart balm statute suits for the return to the donor of gifts in contemplation of marriage.

Here we are concerned with such an action. The plaintiff seeks the return of an engagement ring, a unique type of gift, one whose conditional nature has been recognized for centuries. And, while in this case the condition upon which the ring was given to the defendant could not be carried out at the time, it was the defendant rather…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Furman v. KraussNew York Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Junkersfeld v. Bank of Manhattan Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937
  3. Furman v. KraussAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1941

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API