Man Claims Fiancee Fleeced Him for a Ring

When an engagement doesn’t follow its due course, who gets custody of the ring? The question is central in a lawsuit filed by a man who says his onetime fiancée “rushed” him into marriage, all the while planning to drop him and keep the rock. Rena Hope Friedman and Roger Adler were introduced by their mothers at a Hamptons Labor Day Party. Friedman fell hard for the clinical ophthalmologist, or so he thought, and just six weeks later he spent $58,000 on a ring to mark their engagement. Twelve days after that the whirlwind romance spun to a stop, but Friedman held on to her diamond. Adler thinks he should it get it back; not only that, he accuses his former love of pulling the same scam on other would-be husbands.

According to the Post, Friedman convinced the jeweler who’d sold the ring to put her name on the appraisal form—evidence that she might have been planning to cash it in later. In court papers Adler states that Friedman was "previously engaged to an other male . . . the engagement ended under similar circumstances . . . [she] failed to return the engagement ring in the previous matter." Lawyers for Adler’s case say “an engagement ring belongs to the person who bought it until the marriage occurs.”

And there’s more to suggest Friedman had dollar signs in her eyes: she allegedly milked her betrothed for expensive gifts like a new car and told him "No one travels coach to Australia." Friendman’s biggest con of all? Shaving more than a decade off her age.

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Sabrina Jaszi in News on February 28, 2010 1:15 PM

Comments [rss]

justthinkin

For real, if this guy couldn't read the top line of the eye chart of his future, he should consider himself lucky that he's only out $58K. Better to lose the ring on her finger than to own the one she was going to put on his nose.

FelixtheCat & Christine Quinn'

sucka

justthinkin

He's 42 and she's 41 and they were introduced by their mothers. Are you fucking kidding me? Put the mom's in jail.

Mr Mel

Now that's funny.

ping

Oof! At least those two won't be making any babies.

NannyState

"Priceless."

jgonzz

So he almost married a grifter. But in a way he got off cheap. After marriage and a kid or two, she would get 'half' of whatever and I'd bet that's more than $60,000.

But she did have a point, no one flies coach to Australia..

nicemarmot

Wow. So basically, a scumbag fleeced an idiot - which one am I supposed to be feel bad for, again? The woman who made it clear she was only in it for the money, or the man who saw a pair of titties and ran straight to the jewelry store to spend more than most people's yearly salaries on a stupid ring?

JenChungsBaby

Before deciding which to feel bad for we would need to inspect the titties.

Clarice City

They're both idiots. If a vulgar, ostentatious status symbol is the only thing of interest between you as a couple, the relationship is clearly doomed.

Big tacky ring = divorce in 5 years or less.

NannyState

You got Zales, didn't you?

TrippinJoJo

nah, probably got one from Jared

Amanda Harletsch

these diamond ritual and its participants is one of those very moronic things people in need for status symbols engage into. Come on! is a rock! How many things can be solved if people would to put that money in something a bit more meaningful than a piece of rock!?

I actually find the display primitive and grotesque.

redhookreject

if she gets to keep it, lets hope the IRS goes after her for not reporting it as income.

she seems like she'd handle jail well.

Spirit of 76

With all due respect, I think he needs to see an opthamologist himself. What is he, blind? Some women may be worth $58k. She's not. Besides, if a (purported) 30-year-old is interested in a 42-year-old, it's pretty obviously too good to be true.

JenChungsBaby

Yeah, but it must have been an amazing six weeks though.

eyekantspel

In NY in most cases an engagement ring is a gift given in contemplation of marriage. He should get it back.

ihaveopinions

I didn't know that about NY law (go figure they have a precedent...). Before I heard that, my thoughts are: A gift is a gift. She may be a bitch for keeping it, but once you give something away you can't take it back.

I also agree with the etiquette precedent of "if she rejects him, she returns the ring, if he rejects her, she keeps it," but as with most rules of etiquette, it's only a hard-and-fast rule if you count yourself as a decent person.

LaliP

i thought it was etiquette that if the man breaks up with the lady, she keeps the ring. but if the lady breaks up with the man, she gives it back.

guy should drop it. $58k is probably cheaper than a divorce and time wasted in a bad marriage.