Carroll v. Curry

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that fault for termination of engagement contradicted plain language of replevin statute, which was basis for donor's action to reclaim engagement ring
• noting that an engagement ring given in contemplation of marriage is a conditional gift
• “[t]he primary purpose of the replevin statute” is to “place the successful party in possession of the property”
• the party who fails to perform the condition of the gift has no right to it
• “The primary purpose of the replevin statute is to test the right of possession of personal property and place the successful party in possession of the property.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).