Lindh V. Surman
1. Facts of the case;
2. Issues of Law decided by the court;
3. Procedural history of the case;
4. Holdings, or rulings, made by the court;
5. Legal Reasoning, or rationale, given by the court for its rulings.
Look for each of these components when you read the case. Sometimes they are easy to find, and sometimes they are not. It all depends on the judge who wrote the decision for the court.© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 16, 2018, 10:26 pm ad1c9bdddf
Lindh V. Surman
Plaintiff (appellee) donor presented defendant (appellant) donee with an engagement ring, and then subsequently terminated the engagement. Appellant returned the ring. The couple later reconciled and appellee again proposed marriage, presented the ring, and afterward terminated the engagement. Appellant refused to return the ring, and appellee commenced an action for its recovery.
What is the condition of the gift, acceptance of the engagement of the marriage itself?
The engagement ring is always given subject to the implied condition that if the marriage does not take place the gift shall be returned.
Whether fault is relevant to determining return of the ring.
The donor is entitled to return of the engagement ring even if the donor broke the engagement
? Under a fault-based analysis, return of the ring depends on an assessment of who broke the engagement, which necessarily entails a determination of why that person broke the engagement.
? A no-fault approach, however, involves no investigation into the motives or reasons for the cessation of the engagement and requires the return of the engagement ring simply upon the nonoccurrence of the ...
Reviews the case of Lindh V. Surman and the rationale found by the court for the decision