Also known as: breaches of promise to marry · breach of promise · heart balm action
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A quasi-tort, quasi-contract cause of action available in a minority of jurisdictions for damages arising from the breach of an engagement to marry. Recovery extends to actual expenditures made in preparation for the marriage as well as loss to reputation, mental anguish, and injury to health. Expectancy damages for lost social or financial position are excluded, and punitive damages may be awarded upon a showing of malice.
Bella Barnes and Brendan Burns became engaged and purchased a nonrefundable venue and rings. Brendan abruptly ended the engagement. Bella sues in a jurisdiction retaining the action. She recovers her out-of-pocket wedding costs and proven emotional distress but receives nothing for the higher social standing she anticipated from the marriage.
Beatrice Brown quit her job and relocated at Bruce Baldwin's request after their engagement. Bruce called off the wedding without marrying her. Beatrice sues for breach of promise to marry. The court awards her proven reliance expenditures and mental anguish damages but denies any claim to the financial position she expected as his spouse.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Bethany Boyd contributed unpaid labor to Brendan Burns's company after he promised marriage and co-ownership. Brendan ended the engagement once the business stabilized. Bethany sues for breach of promise to marry. Recovery is limited to any verifiable preparation expenses. The court rejects her claim for the expected ownership interest as an excluded expectancy.
A plaintiff may recover actual expenditures made in preparation for the marriage together with damages for loss to reputation, mental anguish, and injury to health. Expectancy damages for lost social or financial position are not permitted. Punitive damages are available if the defendant acted maliciously.
Supporting sources
Most states have abolished the action by statute as a heartbalm suit. A minority of jurisdictions retain a limited version treated as a hybrid tort and contract claim. The question must specify whether the jurisdiction still recognizes the cause of action.
Supporting sources
Recovery is permitted only for expenditures made in preparation for marriage. When contributions are substantially characterized as a business investment aimed at obtaining an ownership interest, the claim fails because it seeks the very expectancy damages the action excludes.
Supporting sources
…Wade v. Kalbfleisch , 58 N. Y. 282, 284, the question came before the Court of Appeals of New York whether an action for breach of promise of marriage was an action upon a contract within the meaning of certain provisions of the Revised Statutes of that State, and in disposing of the question the court said: “The general…