A court has ruled on the case of an alleged cheater who kept a $70,000 engagement ring in a challenge to state law.

A Massachusetts court has ruled on how to handle a $70,000 engagement ring that is at the center of a dispute between a former couple.

The state rule that required judges to determine who was responsible for the breakdown of a relationship was overturned, and it was decided that the engagement ring should be returned to the person who initially bought it.

The couple, Bruce Johnson and Caroline Settino, began dating in the summer of 2016. According to court documents, Johnson is accused of purchasing expensive gifts and vacations for Settino.

In August 2017, Johnson proposed to Settino's father with a $70,000 diamond engagement ring.

Court filings allege that Johnson accused Settino of being unsupportive and critical, not attending his prostate cancer treatments with him and verbally abusing him.

Settino's mobile phone contained messages from her to an unknown man, which Johnson discovered when he looked through it.

Jennifer Lopez's engagement ring from Ben Affleck promised he was "not going anywhere."

An appeals court ruled that Johnson should possess the ring, while a trial judge determined Settino was entitled to keep it.

In September of this year, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that Johnson should keep the engagement ring.

In the event of a wedding not taking place, the ruling stated that determining "who is at fault" should still be the basis for ownership rights over engagement rings.

A Massachusetts court ruling from over 60 years ago determined that engagement rings are considered conditional gifts and can be returned if the engagement is broken, provided the person returning the ring is "innocent."

In their ruling on Friday, the justices decided to follow the trend of the majority of jurisdictions that have considered the issue and abolish the idea of fault in this context.

If the planned wedding does not occur and the engagement is terminated, the engagement ring must be returned to the donor, regardless of fault, the justices ruled.

The lawyer who represented Bruce Johnson, Stephanie Taverna Siden, expressed her satisfaction with the verdict.

The Associated Press reported that Siden expressed great satisfaction with the court's decision, which was well-reasoned, fair, and just, and advanced Massachusetts law in the right direction.

Rosenberg, one of Settino's lawyers, stated that although they were unhappy with the Associated Press's outcome, they respected the court's decision to adhere to the majority rule of other states.

According to Nicholas Rosenberg, the idea of an engagement ring as a conditional gift is rooted in outdated beliefs and should no longer be a legal loophole in our established rule that a breach of a promise to marry is not considered an injury by law.