Logourl black
From our private database of 12,700+ case briefs...

Albinger v. Harris

Supreme Court of Montana
48 P.3d 711 (2002)


Facts

In 1995, Albinger (plaintiff) and Harris (defendant) began a tumultuous, three-year relationship. In December of that year, Albinger gave Harris a diamond ring. After some initial hesitation, Harris accepted and the parties agreed upon a wedding date. This wedding date was subsequently cancelled, with Harris returning the diamond ring to Albinger. The parties reunited soon thereafter, and Albinger gave the ring to Harris once again. The parties endured several more failed engagements, with the ring being returned to Albinger upon each separation, only to be given back promptly to Harris upon reuniting. At the parties’ final separation, Albinger insisted that Harris take all of the items he gave her, including the ring, and never return. Albinger later brought an action against Harris to have the ring returned. The district court determined that the ring was a conditional gift, to be completed upon the parties’ marriage. As the parties did not marry, the district court ruled that the ring should be returned to Albinger, as all of the gift’s conditions were not satisfied. Harris petitioned for certiorari to the Supreme Court of Montana.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Nelson, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Concurrence/Dissent

The concurrence/dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the judge’s concurrence in part and dissent in part. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 121,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 12,700 briefs, keyed to 172 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.