PA Supreme Court case about man who gave wife CZ engagement ring

[golfer]

The case (decided last week and put online today) is interesting on several levels -- the first of which is the facts (follow the link below). Second, the case has been tossed around in legal circles because one of the judges who dissented is a bit of a quirk and issued his opinion in rhyme -- which was not unusual for this judge. However, two other judges took the very unusual step of issuing harsh criticism of the rhyming judge, stating that his bizarre opinions were harming the credibility of the court.

The legal issue in the case was whether the groom's lying about whether the ring was real (and valuing it at $21,000) on the prenuptial agreement invalidated the prenuptial agreement (because of fraud). The court held that the bride's reliance was not reasonable, i.e., she should have had it appraised, and therefore held the prenup valid.

http://www.aopc.org/OpPosting/index/SupremeOpindex.asp#month

The first link is the majority opinion, I believe the last link is the rhyming opinion.

 

[DiehardSearcher]

I must concur with Judge Eakin's dissent
as unlawful deceipt was Porreco's intent;

Poor Susan was swindled in '84,
Why did she stay
an entire decade
and not dump him before?

Something is clear in this little story,
and nothing to do with cubic zircony;
Susan Porreco sure learned the lesson,
Never ever trust a car salesman!

 

[mike04456]

Apparently the case isn't quite over yet--the court only decided one of the issues that would have ended it.

The facts of the case are entertaining. Seems she was only 17 and still in high school, and he was 45 when they met. What's more, he showered her with tens of thousands of dollars in jewelry before and after their wedding, but for some unexplained reason, stiffed her on the engagement ring.

One more reason to insist on a grading certificate, I guess.