0
 

home
news
wu-tang clan
bio's
media
store
blogs
forum
contact

Go Back   Wu-Tang Corp. - Official Site of the Wu-Tang Clan > The Elements > Know The Ledge

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-08-2014, 03:45 PM   #1
check two
N.I.
 
check two's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 33,833
Rep Power: 10
check two King of Kings (Five Pointed Palm Exploding Heart Technique)check two King of Kings (Five Pointed Palm Exploding Heart Technique)check two King of Kings (Five Pointed Palm Exploding Heart Technique)check two King of Kings (Five Pointed Palm Exploding Heart Technique)check two King of Kings (Five Pointed Palm Exploding Heart Technique)check two King of Kings (Five Pointed Palm Exploding Heart Technique)check two King of Kings (Five Pointed Palm Exploding Heart Technique)check two King of Kings (Five Pointed Palm Exploding Heart Technique)check two King of Kings (Five Pointed Palm Exploding Heart Technique)check two King of Kings (Five Pointed Palm Exploding Heart Technique)check two King of Kings (Five Pointed Palm Exploding Heart Technique)
Default Are engagement rings a feminist scam?

Man breaks up with fiancee, She Keeps $53,000 Engagement Ring



Almost as awkward as a broken engagement is deciding what to do with the ring. For one jilted fiancée, the decision to keep her $53,000 white-gold, 2.97-carat ring was made in court. Late last week, New York State Supreme Court Justice Russell P. Buscaglia ruled that 38-year-old Christa M. Clark could keep her ring, in a lawsuit filed by her ex-fiancé Louis J. Billittier Jr., 55, to reclaim it.

On July 1, 2012, only three months before their wedding, Clark, a nail technician from upstate New York, received a shocking text message from Billittier, co-owner of Chef’s Restaurant and her fiancé of three years, according to a story published by the Buffalo News. He informed her that their relationship was over. “You’re doing this through a text message?” she replied. Billittier promised to reimburse Clark for money she had spent on wedding preparations. He then added, “Plus you get a $50,000 parting ring. Enough for a down payment on a house.”

A few weeks later, angry that Clark was still in contact with his family, Billittier texted, “Keep it up, and I will take back the ring as well.” His final message: “You by law have to give it back. You’re nowhere near the person I thought you were. You don’t deserve it.”

Those text messages sealed Billittier’s fate. Judge Russell P. Buscaglia ruled that because Billittier referred to the ring as a “parting gift,” it no longer was associated with the promise of marriage.

“I was being sarcastic, like a game show host – you get a parting gift,” Billittier claimed, in his own defense. That excuse didn't hold up for the judge, who called it a classic case of "giver's remorse."

Yahoo Shine could not reach Clark, Billittier or his lawyer for comment, however Clark’s attorney Beverley S. Braun told Yahoo Shine, “We believe the decision speaks for itself regarding the applicable legal standards.”

According to the documents emailed to Yahoo Shine from Judge Buscaglia’s office, prior to 1965, a law dubbed “The heart balm statute” prohibited people from suing their exes to reclaim engagement rings. However, that law changed to allow people to retreive gifts given in contemplation of marriage, regardless of why the relationship ended. And in New York state, the groom usually does get the ring back, with one exception — if the intent of the ring changes. In Billittier’s case, he referred to the ring as a ‘parting gift,’ which changed its meaning.

“Many gifts are given for reasons that sour with the passage of time,” wrote Buscaglia in his ruling. “Unfortunately, the gift law does not allow a donor to recover or revoke…a gift simply because his or her reasons for giving it have soured.”

The lesson: In love, there are no guarantees — especially when it comes to jewelry.
__________________


check two is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2014, 08:13 PM   #2
Paranoid
Venom
 
Paranoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,473
Rep Power: 26
Paranoid fist of furyParanoid fist of furyParanoid fist of furyParanoid fist of furyParanoid fist of furyParanoid fist of furyParanoid fist of furyParanoid fist of furyParanoid fist of furyParanoid fist of furyParanoid fist of fury
Default

Paranoid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2014, 12:05 AM   #3
diggy
The ABBOTT
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: O-Block
Posts: 10,958
Blog Entries: 4
Rep Power: 50
diggy Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)diggy Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)diggy Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)diggy Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)diggy Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)diggy Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)diggy Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)diggy Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)diggy Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)diggy Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)diggy Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by check two View Post
Man breaks up with fiancee, She Keeps $53,000 Engagement Ring



Almost as awkward as a broken engagement is deciding what to do with the ring. For one jilted fiancée, the decision to keep her $53,000 white-gold, 2.97-carat ring was made in court. Late last week, New York State Supreme Court Justice Russell P. Buscaglia ruled that 38-year-old Christa M. Clark could keep her ring, in a lawsuit filed by her ex-fiancé Louis J. Billittier Jr., 55, to reclaim it.

On July 1, 2012, only three months before their wedding, Clark, a nail technician from upstate New York, received a shocking text message from Billittier, co-owner of Chef’s Restaurant and her fiancé of three years, according to a story published by the Buffalo News. He informed her that their relationship was over. “You’re doing this through a text message?” she replied. Billittier promised to reimburse Clark for money she had spent on wedding preparations. He then added, “Plus you get a $50,000 parting ring. Enough for a down payment on a house.”

A few weeks later, angry that Clark was still in contact with his family, Billittier texted, “Keep it up, and I will take back the ring as well.” His final message: “You by law have to give it back. You’re nowhere near the person I thought you were. You don’t deserve it.”

Those text messages sealed Billittier’s fate. Judge Russell P. Buscaglia ruled that because Billittier referred to the ring as a “parting gift,” it no longer was associated with the promise of marriage.

“I was being sarcastic, like a game show host – you get a parting gift,” Billittier claimed, in his own defense. That excuse didn't hold up for the judge, who called it a classic case of "giver's remorse."

Yahoo Shine could not reach Clark, Billittier or his lawyer for comment, however Clark’s attorney Beverley S. Braun told Yahoo Shine, “We believe the decision speaks for itself regarding the applicable legal standards.”

According to the documents emailed to Yahoo Shine from Judge Buscaglia’s office, prior to 1965, a law dubbed “The heart balm statute” prohibited people from suing their exes to reclaim engagement rings. However, that law changed to allow people to retreive gifts given in contemplation of marriage, regardless of why the relationship ended. And in New York state, the groom usually does get the ring back, with one exception — if the intent of the ring changes. In Billittier’s case, he referred to the ring as a ‘parting gift,’ which changed its meaning.

“Many gifts are given for reasons that sour with the passage of time,” wrote Buscaglia in his ruling. “Unfortunately, the gift law does not allow a donor to recover or revoke…a gift simply because his or her reasons for giving it have soured.”

The lesson: In love, there are no guarantees — especially when it comes to jewelry.


__________________







Quote:
Believe it or not, lobster and crabs are crustaceans and are a part of the arthropod family, which include caterpillars, cockroaches, and spiders!

A Galactic Funking Hunt Wit Not Wont
diggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2014, 12:43 AM   #4
zooruka
.
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,791
Rep Power: 21
zooruka prodigal sonzooruka prodigal sonzooruka prodigal sonzooruka prodigal sonzooruka prodigal sonzooruka prodigal son
Default

If feminist's had there way men would have babies.
zooruka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2014, 07:15 AM   #5
beautifulrock
BIG DOUGH KEBAB
 
beautifulrock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Age: 45
Posts: 15,317
Rep Power: 62
beautifulrock Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)beautifulrock Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)beautifulrock Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)beautifulrock Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)beautifulrock Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)beautifulrock Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)beautifulrock Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)beautifulrock Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)beautifulrock Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)beautifulrock Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)beautifulrock Iron Lungs (Fists of Legend)
Default

I actually think they're a scam by anti-feminists. It makes more sense.
__________________

While you were busy dissing Wu like a bitch ass/ I was getting served after sex breakfast/ Yeah, that BBW groupie shit/ can get you served a droopy dick/ fuck what you're speaking/ 'cause I throw W's with Puerto Ricans
beautifulrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:29 AM.


Copyright ©2000 - 2013 The Wu-Tang Corp. & shift-one