The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
McGrath v. Dockendorf
No. 160262Supreme Court of Virginia
160262 McGrath v. Dockendorf 12/15/2016 In a detinue action for recovery of an engagement ring following the termination of a couple's engagement, the circuit court did not err in ordering a former fiancée to …
Clerk language is kept verbatim. Vote Files does not infer who is winning.The movement
Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.
The proof
The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.
160262 McGrath v. Dockendorf 12/15/2016 In a detinue action for recovery of an engagement ring following the termination of a cou…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First seen
- Oct 4, 2026
- Last entry
- Dec 15, 2016
No bill or executive-order citation is attached to this file.
Official docket
Case timeline
The clerk's wording is shown verbatim and linked to the court's own document page where available.
Docket entry
160262 McGrath v. Dockendorf 12/15/2016 In a detinue action for recovery of an engagement ring following the termination of a couple's engagement, the circuit court did not err in ordering a former fiancée to return the engagement ring or pay its $26,000 value to the plaintiff. The Virginia "heart balm" statute, Code § 8.01-220, does not bar such an action to recovery property transferred as a conditional gift, such as an engagement ring, given in contemplation of marriage. The trial court found as fact that the ring was given as a conditional gift in contemplation of marriage. The marriage did not occur. Consequently, the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.
Open court document ↗Documents and links