They say that diamonds are forever, which is more than can be said for many marriages. In the aftermath of one of the most over-hyped celebrity weddings in recent history, a 20-karat diamond ring is at issue in the divorce of Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries.
Far from being likened to a diamond, their marriage lasted only 72 days before Kardashian decided she wanted out. Recently, Humphries said he wants her $2 million engagement ring returned to him. The question now is: does he have a legal entitlement to it?
That's a tricky question to answer. A recent Huffington Post article consulted with a family law attorney who often handles celebrity divorces. He said: "An engagement ring is a gift of contemplation, a contemplation of marriage . . . If it doesn't take place the prospective husband has an argument to get the ring back. But this marriage took place."
On the other hand, an expensive item like this is usually purchased under the good-faith assumption that the marriage will last at least as long as the leftover food from the wedding.
The article quotes an unnamed source close to Humphries who says: "Kris wants the ring back because the marriage only lasted 72 days and he believes it was based on fraud and deceit . . . Kris realizes that with Kim it's all about material objects and she truly treasures things over people in her life."
What do readers think? When the length of a marriage is easily counted in terms of days, should the scorned spouse be able to recover his or her expensive gifts from the one who broke things off?
Source: Huffington Post, "Kim Kardashian Divorce: Kris Humphries Wants Engagement Ring Back," May 8, 2012
