just like he provided a roof over her head for how many years of the same bargin?
Dude ordered to pay $50,000 for breaking engagement.
- Thread starter skeetsinternal
- Start date
should he pay her alimony too?
Every single decision they made and how they lived was in the form of a marriage. The engagement also proves that the decisions were being made on the expectations of marriage from both parties.
He fukked up, Not her.
Were they suppose to put their decisions on hold (which affect kid's lives) until they finalized wedding details.
Yes she should have demanded he marry her before she had his child, before she quit her job and before she became a stay at home mom.
On top of that, she found out he was cheating shortly after he proposed so she made another dumb decision by continuing the relationship and still not demanding marriage which is what she wanted and why she stayed.
He did fukk up but so did she.
We already went through all that up thread. They had a contracted which she fulfilled and he did not.
lol The settlement is a form of alimony already. He will probably make it in payments.
but then shouldn't she just get to keep the ring since he did not fulfill his end and that's that?
EDIT: shouldn't the ring be the settlement?
True but she had no chance to transition inot the lifestyle change. Again, even an employer will give you unemployment. You can't just go from not working for 10 years to making enough to support 3 people.
I don't remember if the ring was apart of the settlement or not. Did she get to keep it or did she have to give it back?
Edit: As far as I know he didn't ask for the ring back so then no it would not be part of the settlement.
What contract did they have?
You realize she had an outside relationship as well, right?
The only reason she was awarded any money is because they purchased property together and she got half the value of the house. Even the Georgia courts were divided on the issue so it's not like there is any clear law on the matter.
not sure wasn't very clear (heck the whole story isn't super clear to begin with)
what i'm arguing is that the ring should have been the only settlement if we go that route. I think i remember reading somewhere in this thread that that's what the ring is about. in any case the whole thing is kinda stupid. Dude is an a$$hole, she acted very foolishly, the judge decided in her favor, whatever. Like I said, I'm actually curious to follow up on what will happen next (appeals, etc) and if this decision will be used in other cases as an argument.
Exactly at some point you have to take responsibility for how someone is treating you.
I agree with all of that (except for the ring part). It's an odd case.
"In response, Cooper filed a lawsuit for a number of claims, including fraud and breach of contract to marry. The Coweta County Superior Court awarded her $43,500 and attorney fees of $6,500."
If you can prove she owes you.
Was the contract 'verbal' aka, "I promise to do this for you" or was it written?