Georgia Man Ordered to Pay $50k for Not Marrying GF

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

A Georgia man who promised to marry his girlfriend but then didn't has been ordered to pay $50,000 after the woman sued him for fraud and "breach of promise to marry."
Christopher Ned Kelley and Melissa Cooper had been living together for four years when Kelley proposed to Cooper in 2004, and even bought her an engagement ring valued at $10,000.
The couple continued sharing a household along with their shared child and another child from Cooper's previous relationship until 2011, when Cooper learned that Kelley had cheated on her for a second time.
Cooper, who had quit her job to become a full-time mother based on the assumption that Kelley would become the sole breadwinner after their marriage, was asked by Kelley to move out, and take the children with her.
Cooper responded by filing a lawsuit against Kelley, alleging "breach of promise to marry," among other claims.
She won her suit and was awarded $50,000 by the trial court.
Kelley subsequently appealed the ruling, claiming his relationship with Cooper was not unlike prostitution, in that he was merely Cooper's john.
As such, Kelley's defense claimed, their relationship was illegal, and therefore the promise to marry was unenforceable.
For good measure, Kelley also told the court he "never initiated the concept of marriage with her, outside of giving her that ring" and "never said the words 'will you marry me' to her."
Kelley lost again, with Judge Elizabeth Branch deciding [pdf] that the "object" of the promise Kelley made to Cooper was "not illegal or against public policy," even if the relationship had "the nature of prostitution."
Kelley was again ordered to pay Cooper $50,000.

Crazy stuff here, now I'm definitely never gonna propose to a chick

 

[Sundancer]

Both sound like idiots.

 

[Anita18]

Both sound like idiots.

Usually the case when a relationship goes south this badly.

 

[KevanG]

I hope some people I know never hear of this. They'll be in a lot of trouble otherwise. *sneaks off to send to people in facebook to start war*

 

[Sawyer]

**** marriage, man...

 

[KevanG]

That's what he was trying to do.

 

[Sawyer]

Oh you.

 

[KevanG]

 

[Teelie]

I think the $50,000 is reasonable, but not for the explanation given. Failing to marry someone should not result in a financial penalty and shouldn't be penalized like this at all. Child support or loss of income (she quit her job on the promise of marriage) are more reasonable.

With this ruling a marriage propsal becomes a legally binding contract instead of an intent to initiate a contract (which a marriage is technically).

 

[Enriquespy]

In Mexico you can sue your fb/gf id he/she proposes and don't marries you after 5 years.

Or if you dater for 10 years and he doesn't propose.

 

[Joshua_B]

Kelley sounds very greedy and selfish; he doesn't deserve a woman who'd stay with him all those years. Cooper should keep after him until he pays up, and increase the amount every time he refuses.

 

[Marvolo]

I'd tell em all to shove it up their ass. You can't force me to marry anyone and I sure as **** wouldn't go through with it if I was having second thoughts.

 

[SentinelMind]

I have trouble finding any sympathy for the guy....if report is accurate, he was cheating on his girlfriend with multiple women, asking her to quit her job to raise children...then wants to kick her and the kids out.

When you let someone move in premises, you have to be mindful of 30-day written eviction requirement laws (even if the ex-gf/ex-bf/friend whatever never paid any rent/mortgage and name is not on any title). Furthermore, the ex can claim some right on any property that he or she financially contributed towards improving. Just because there is no written contract doesn't mean government doesn't recognize a legal relationship.

 

[Xeno]

I think the $50,000 is reasonable, but not for the explanation given. Failing to marry someone should not result in a financial penalty and shouldn't be penalized like this at all. Child support or loss of income (she quit her job on the promise of marriage) are more reasonable.

With this ruling a marriage propsal becomes a legally binding contract instead of an intent to initiate a contract (which a marriage is technically).

The woman is getting child support, but she also lost her home when he kicked her out and was saddled with caring for his child who is not biologically hers. The suit was a way to get compensation for her monetary losses from the breakup. Her lawyer was able to successfully prove fraud because the man testified in court that he never intended to marry her in spite of proposing and giving her a $10,000 ring. His lawyer should have advised him not to admit to fraud under oath. Maybe he can sue for legal malpractice.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Idjits

 

[Teelie]

The woman is getting child support, but she also lost her home when he kicked her out and was saddled with caring for his child who is not biologically hers. The suit was a way to get compensation for her monetary losses from the breakup. Her lawyer was able to successfully prove fraud because the man testified in court that he never intended to marry her in spite of proposing and giving her a $10,000 ring. His lawyer should have advised him not to admit to fraud under oath. Maybe he can sue for legal malpractice.

If he was sued for fraud, it should be for fraud, not failing to marry someone. And it was her kid from a previous relationship, not his.