“Many gifts are made for reasons that sour with the passage of time. Unfortunately, gift law does not allow a donor to recover/revoke a gift simply because his or her reasons for giving it have soured.” —Harsha, Judge 

Facts: Lester Cooper suffered serious injuries that caused him to be hospitalized for an extended time period. While he was hospitalized, Julie Smith, whom Cooper had met the year before, and Janet Smith, Julie’s mother, made numerous trips to visit him. A romantic relationship developed between Cooper and Julie. While in the hospital, Cooper proposed marriage to Julie, and she accepted. Cooper ultimately received an $180,000 settlement for his injuries. After being released from the hospital, Cooper moved into Janet’s house and lived with Janet and Julie. Over the next couple months, Cooper purchased a number of items for Julie, including a diamond engagement ring, a car, a computer, a tanning bed, and horses. On Julie’s request, Cooper paid off Janet’s car. Cooper also paid for various improvements to Janet’s house, such as having a new furnace installed and having wood flooring laid in the kitchen. Several months later, the settlement money had run out, and Julie had not yet married Cooper. About six months later, Julie and Cooper had a disagreement, and Cooper moved out of the house. Julie returned the engagement ring to Cooper. Cooper sued Julie and Janet to recover the gifts or the value of the gifts he had given them. The magistrate who heard the case dismissed Cooper’s case, and the trial court affirmed the dismissal of the case. Cooper appealed. 

Issue: Can Cooper recover the gifts or the value of the gifts he gave to Julie and Janet Smith? 

Language of the Court: Unless the parties have agreed otherwise, the donor is entitled to recover the engagement ring (or its value) if the marriage does not occur, regardless of who ended the engagement. Unlike the engagement ring, the other gifts have no symbolic meaning. Rather, they are merely “tokens of love and affection” which the donor bore for the donee. Many gifts are made for reasons that sour with the passage of time. Unfortunately, gift law does not allow a donor to recover/revoke a gift simply because his or her reasons for giving it have soured. Generally, a completed gift is absolute and irrevocable. Cooper offered no evidence establishing that he gave the gifts on the express condition that they be returned to him if the engagement ended. Thus, the gifts are irrevocable gifts and Cooper is not entitled to their return. 

Decision: The court of appeals held that the gifts made by Cooper to Julie (other than the engagement ring) and to Janet were irrevocable gifts that he could not recover simply because his engagement with Julie ended. The court of appeals affirmed the judgment of the trial court, allowing Julie and Janet Smith to keep these gifts. 

Ethics Questions: Did Julie and Janet Smith act ethically in keeping the gifts Cooper had given them? Did Cooper act ethically in trying to get the gifts back?