In a closely watched case that has earned national attention, the Supreme Court of Massachusetts ruled last week that engagement rings are "conditional gifts" that must be returned to the giver if the couple breaks up and calls the wedding off — no matter who is to blame for ending the relationship.

The ruling closes the books on an archaic state precedent that required litigators to argue who was at fault for the breakup before a judge could render a decision about who would get the ring.

Massachusetts' highest court agreed to hear the case after the state's lower courts delivered contradictory opinions in the case of Johnson v. Settino.

Bruce Johnson and Caroline Settino were briefly engaged in 2017, but Johnson broke off the relationship and asked for the return of a $70,000 engagement ring when he suspected that his fiancée was having an affair.

In 2021, a Massachusetts Superior Court ruled that Johnson’s suspicions were unfounded and that it was his fault the wedding was called off. As a result, Settino was entitled to keep the ring. Based on a 60-year-old Massachusetts precedent, Johnson could have retained the ring if he could have convinced the court that the breakup was his fiancée's fault.

But, then a Massachusetts Appeals Court in 2023 flipped the lower court’s decision, ruling that Johnson had the right to call off the engagement and retain the ring even if couldn’t prove infidelity.

“Sometimes there simply is no fault to be had,” the court said.

On Friday, the Massachusetts Supreme Court agreed, writing, “We now join the modern trend adopted by the majority of jurisdictions that have considered the issue and retire the concept of fault in this context. Where, as here, the planned wedding does not ensue and the engagement is ended, the engagement ring must be returned to the donor regardless of fault.”

The Massachusetts decision falls in line with a majority of states that currently take the “no fault” approach. They consider engagement rings a “conditional” gift that should be returned by the recipient if the relationship fails to culminate in a marriage. Who is at fault is not considered.

Credit: Image by BigStockPhoto.com.