Mario Williams suing ex-fiance for engagement ring

#1
TOP

TOP

unconventional
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
26,640
Likes
1,814
#1
Mario Williams Signs $100M Football Contract, but Sues Over $785K Engagement Ring - ABC News

Buffalo Bills defensive end Mario Williams has gone on the offensive. He wants the 10-carat $785,000 diamond engagement ring he gave to Erin Marzouki, his former fiancée, back.

Their engagement didn’t even last a year. Marzouki broke up with Williams last January, and he now wants the 10-carat diamond back.

The lawsuit details just how much Williams spent on Marzouki during their relationship. Items included an American Express credit card she could use to pay her living expenses — she rang up $108,000 in charges in one year — on top of the $230,000 in other gifts he showered on her that same year, according to the court record.
Click to expand...


Now I ain't sayin' she a gold digger, but she ain't messin' with no broke...

I like the title of the article. Wonder who came up with it... seems whoever it was, believes Mario Williams should just let it slide because he just signed a contract for 100 million. smh

Sure, he's rich, but you'd go broke pretty quickly giving away $800,000 items. Plus, he'll almost definitely never see all 100 million of his contract. In a couple years they won't want to be him 20 million a year and he'll be cut.


What’s the honorable thing for Marzouki to do? Give the ring back?
Click to expand...

Nah... ya think?

Unless the guy wants her to keep it, I'd say keeping it is pretty low. Most women aren't going to keep it but rather, sell it. That's basically just stealing.
 
#2
#2
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOxb_SW4Cfg[/youtube]
 
#3
#3
so should he be able to get back everything he ever gave her or only this ring?
 
#4
#4
utvolpj said:
so should he be able to get back everything he ever gave her or only this ring?
Click to expand...

In the perfect world you'd get everything back but just the ring. The ring was given to her with the condition they be married. They never got married so she has no right to it. Broken agreement, verbal contract, whatever you want to call it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5
#5
unless he got it in writing I'm guessing she'll get it. Expensive lesson to learn
 
#6
#6
utvolpj said:
unless he got it in writing I'm guessing she'll get it. Expensive lesson to learn
Click to expand...

She we will keep it if her lawyer can prove he broke it off with her.

As the story goes, she broke it off with him.

Most states it's a conditional gift and is returned if there is no marriage.

In Texas, it's dependent upon who called off the wedding. It's a conditional gift if the woman calls it off. Which is obviously why Mario Williams made it public she broke it off. If he broke it off, he forfeits it.

If both argue the other broke it off, I would think it would go back to the dude since he purchased it. But I don't know how they figure that out if it's just his word vs. her word.
 
#9
#9
Just my opinion, but she should give the ring back. She will not keep this for any reason at all. What she would end up doing is to sell it off or go to Pawn Stars.
 
#10
#10
Expensive lesson is right. He GAVE her the ring.... It's now her ring. I don't feel sorry for him at all. Wanting it back now (and apparently going public with what should be a private matter ITFP) just makes him look like a big baby. If I were an opposing player I'd razz his lame self all game long about it....
 
Last edited:
#11
#11
bluetickhound16 said:
Expensive lesson is right. He GAVE her the ring.... It's now her ring. I don't feel sorry for him at all.
Click to expand...

Except that's not how the law works in most states.



Engagement ring - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Legal ownership

In most states of the United States, engagement rings are considered "conditional gifts" under the legal rules of property. This is an exception to the general rule that gifts cannot be revoked once properly given. See, for example, the case of Meyer v. Mitnick, 625 N.W.2d 136 (Michigan, 2001), whose ruling found the following reasoning persuasive: "the so-called 'modern trend' holds that because an engagement ring is an inherently conditional gift, once the engagement has been broken, the ring should be returned to the donor. Thus, the question of who broke the engagement and why, or who was 'at fault,' is irrelevant. This is the no-fault line of cases."
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#13
#13
TOP said:
Except that's not how the law works in most states.



Engagement ring - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


Note the term "should be"... Not MUST be. That is a bunch of junk anyway. Should she have to repay any expensive dinners or trips? How about any other incidental "gifts" he may have given her? Flowers? Candy? Should she have to repay this guy for all that too?
 
Last edited:
#14
#14
bluetickhound16 said:
Note the term "should be"... Not MUST be. That is a bunch of BS anyway. Should she have to repay any expensive dinners or trips? How about any other incidental "gifts" he may have given her? Flowers? Candy? Should she have to repay this lame guy for all that too?
Click to expand...

No... in most states, it must be returned if the guy wants it back and he'll win in court every time.

And how is it bull? You referred to them as incidental gifts. Is that what they're called?

That's why this falls under conditional gift. The gift is received under the condition you marry them. Until then, she's just borrowing it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#15
#15
Why just the ring then? Why shouldn't Williams sue her for every single expense (that he kept the reciepts for...) he ever incurred while dating this woman? I get the new interpretation of the law that most states go by now but it still doesn't make it right. If you are such a guy that you would cry about a ring like this why even buy it in the first place? And what would he do if they DID get married only to divorce later? Do these "laws" only affect engagements or can somebody get "their" ring back after a divorce also? Same broken contract....
 
Last edited:
#17
#17
She ought to flush the damn thing down the toilet. Since it's not hers anyway she has no liability if it gets lost or stolen....
 
#19
#19
TOP said:
She we will keep it if her lawyer can prove he broke it off with her.

As the story goes, she broke it off with him.

Most states it's a conditional gift and is returned if there is no marriage.
Click to expand...

This is true! I actually attended a seminar last year and one of the speakers was talking about a case just like this, so at least in TN, there is some legal precedent.
 
#21
#21
Thrasher865 said:
She's a damn gold digger, and we shouldn't encourage these types of people.
Click to expand...

Maybe so, but my pride wouldn't let me go crying to the press about an engagement ring.... No matter what it cost/was worth.... Of course, I wouldn't spend that kind of money on a ring even i f I HAD that kind of money!
 
#23
#23
Any other gift I'd say is hers to keep. But I would say an engagement ring goes back to him. Just my opinion.
 
#24
#24
vollygirl said:
Any other gift I'd say is hers to keep. But I would say an engagement ring goes back to him. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...
I would think most women would feel the same way but to my line of thinking, a gift is a gift. I just couldn't ask for the ring back, if it were me....
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top