Dude ordered to pay $50,000 for breaking engagement.

[™BlackPearl The Empress™]

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.

She sued for a breach of contract. That is where I am getting the term contract from. She claims they had a verbal one and he claims they didn't. That is what the whole case was about. I know she had an outside relationship but that still has nothing to do with the orginal agreement or why the agreement was broken.
I also understand they bought property together but I am going to assume that she did not pay the half that she was award. I assume she paided WAY less so I do think the other charges came into play. I didn't say it was clear cut. I am just arguing one said. The side that won.

 

[kevm3]

She sued for a breach of contract. That is where I am getting the term contract from. She claims they had a verbal one and he claims they didn't. That is what the whole case was about. I know she had an outside relationship but that still has nothing to do with the orginal agreement or why the agreement was broken.
I also understand they bought property together but I am going to assume that she did not pay the half that she was award. I assume she paided WAY less so I do think the other charges came into play. I didn't say it was clear cut. I am just arguing one said. The side that won.

So if a man asks a woman, "Do you promise to be with me forever" and she says yes, he should have the ability to legally punish her and get payments through the court system if she feels she wants to move on because she is breaching her 'legal contract'?

 

[™BlackPearl The Empress™]

Was the contract 'verbal' aka, "I promise to do this for you" or was it written?

Verbal contracts are still contacts; just harder to prove. It was verbal. He claimed it wasn't binding and she claimed it was. But he also followed up with a ring and providing for her which worked against him. He lost.

 

[QuintessentialBM]

Get engaged, brehs........

 

[™BlackPearl The Empress™]

So if a man asks a woman, "Do you promise to be with me forever" and she says yes, he should have the ability to legally punish her and get payments through the court system if she feels she wants to move on because she is breaching her 'legal contract'?

But you keep focusing on just the marriage aspect. The case is not really about the marriage. It's about him leaving her with no income and 2 kids. The rest is just supposing aurgements.

 

[villain]

She sued for a breach of contract. That is where I am getting the term contract from. She claims they had a verbal one and he claims they didn't. That is what the whole case was about. I know she had an outside relationship but that still has nothing to do with the orginal agreement or why the agreement was broken.
I also understand they bought property together but I am going to assume that she did not pay the half that she was award. I assume she paided WAY less so I do think the other charges came into play. I didn't say it was clear cut. I am just arguing one said. The side that won.

Yeah but in this thread you're claiming they had some contract that entitled her to financial support as apart of some agreement and that's why she got paid, which isn't true. The only thing that's in question is whether or not he was going to marry her. If she did have an outside relationship, that would mean he had a good reason not to want to marry her even if he did agree to that initially.

She got paid because the courts would have given her half of the house if he did follow through on the marriage and then left.

 

[™BlackPearl The Empress™]

Yeah but in this thread you're claiming they had some contract that entitled her to financial support as apart of some agreement and that's why she got paid, which isn't true. The only thing that's in question is whether or not he was going to marry her. If she did have an outside relationship, that would mean he had a good reason not to want to marry her even if he did agree to that initially.

She got paid because the courts would have given her half of the house if he did follow through on the marriage and then left.

Yeah but he didn't marry her so by your reasoning she shouldn't have even gotten half (assuming she didn't pay for half. I'm assuming she contributed to the down payment). The support he gave her, just like the ring, is proof/evidence that he was "pretending" like they would be married. It's not the whole case just one of the many preservatives the case can be argued from. I have argued from different points and I am sure her lawyers did more of the same. Ultimately, she was awarded more than what she contributed b/c she was able to prove fraud and that she suffered a loss. She would have not suffered a loss had she been working. The fact that he was the sole provider is a supporting argument.

 

[AntiHero]

 

[↓R↑LYB]

She didn't really play herself though.

They got engaged. They brought property together. they had a kid. They made a decision for her to stay at home and take care of the kid while he worked.

Everything they did was in the form of a marriage.

Last I checked, being engaged wasn't a legally binding contract with the state and two individuals. I wonder if the judge was a man or woman

 

[Taadow]

Verbal contracts are still contacts; just harder to prove. It was verbal. He claimed it wasn't binding and she claimed it was. But he also followed up with a ring and providing for her which worked against him. He lost.

So if Shalamar has a concert and sings "This Is For The Lover In You", the 3,000 women in the amphitheater have grounds to sue Howard Hewitt if he doesn't marry all of them? I mean, everybody saw and heard him...

 

[CrimsonTider]

Last I checked, being engaged wasn't a legally binding contract with the state and two individuals. I wonder if the judge was a man or woman

what do you call everything that took place after the engagement?

 

[LezJepzin]

She knew about them certs

 

[↓R↑LYB]

what do you call everything that took place after the engagement?

After they were engaged, did they sign paperwork that involved the state in which they resided

 

[↓R↑LYB]

She knew about them certs

Cosign. That's why I keep my certs locked away in a safety deposit box. Them cert groupies a bunch of god damn demons

 

[He Who Posts Well]

This is a bargain compared to what he'd have to pay if they were married and gotten a divorce.