Our TV Shows

Got a Tip?

Call TMZ at (888) 847-9869 or Click Here

Mystery Actor Sues Ex-Fiancée

You Jacked My

$90k Engagement Ring!!

2/17/2012 5:00 AM PST BY TMZ STAFF

Breaking off an engagement SUCKS ... especially when the breaker-offer REFUSES to return the $90,000 engagement ring ... this according to a big actor who has sued his ex-fiancee.

For some reason, the lawyer repping the actor has filed the lawsuit under the fictitious name, John Doe. The actor is suing Lisa Ragland -- claiming she broke off their engagement in 2003 but REFUSED to return the $90,000 engagement ring.

Sources connected to the case tell us "John Doe" is not Ian Ziering, who was also engaged to  Ragland around the same time. Our sources tell us ... it's a "huge actor."

According to the lawsuit, after Ragland called off the engagement, she told the actor she lost the ring ... and he believed her.

That is, until 2010 ... when she fessed up and admitted she had the ring all along. So now Doe is suing her for either return of the ring or its full cash value.

Here's the deal -- under California law, if an engagement is called off, the guy always gets the ring back ... and it doesn't matter who broke it off. The ring is considered a "gift in contemplation of marriage" ... so if the marriage doesn't take place, the ring goes back.

Stay tuned.


No Avatar


Really? It's a HUGE actor yet he's that worried over a 90k ring? Don't huge actors spend about 10 times that on engagement rings? It's got to be Ian Ziering. The girl's not even hot so no way an A-list actor proposed to her.

925 days ago


It literaly took 15 seconds to find out Ian Ziering is the "unamed" litigant. Give him back the ring.

925 days ago


a really big actor got engaged to this woman...and no one knows about it? you google her, and the only big actor she is featured with is ziering? but, ziering is NOT the spurned ex-fiance? i'd like to take this special moment to call bullsh!t, please. thank you for coming. please don't forget your coats on the way out.

925 days ago

Savvy Beotch    

What a C**T. I hope this destoryes her financially.

925 days ago

Thurston Howell III    

Give this guy's ring back you money grubbing POS. I hope this lady has to pay both her AND his attorney fees.

This lady has no class and no shame. Typical L.A. money grab.

925 days ago


Richard Rucculo was the actor she was engaged to in 2003.

925 days ago


Actually, John Doe IS Ian Ziering. And it only took a couple of minutes on Google to figure it out. Who researches the stories for you, TMZ?
There's a People Magazine article dated May 19, 2003 that gives "updates" on all the 90210 crowd. It says that Ian is dating Lisa Ragland as of that date. The lawsuit that "John Doe" filed says that they became engaged in December 2003. Ian was still with Lisa at that time, and was in fact STILL with her as late as 2005. There are all sorts of photos from premieres available if you just look for them.
Someone with a little time could probably find a photo of them together with her actually WEARING the ring.
But yeah, it's totally Ian.
As for the California law about giving back the ring--that's a pretty standard law, not unique to California. The offering of the ring is the offering of marriage--the accepting of the ring is agreeing to marry. It doesn't matter who breaks it off, if the marriage never takes place, the ring goes back to the person who offered it.

925 days ago


I do not believe your facts are correct on what the law says in California. I am pretty sure it depends on who breaks off the engagement as to who gets the ring. If the guy breaks it, then the girl gets to keep the ring.

925 days ago


California Civil Code 1590 says:

Where either party to a contemplated marriage in this State
makes a gift of money or property to the other on the basis or
assumption that the marriage will take place, in the event that the donee refuses to enter into the marriage as contemplated or that it is given up by mutual consent, the donor may recover such gift or such part of its value as may, under all of the cir***stances of thecase, be found by a court or jury to be just.

925 days ago


Actually you have it wrong TMZ..if the ring was given on a holiday or birthday then its a gift and he doesn't get it back nor does he get it back if he cheats and calls off the wedding.....Under California statute, the cir***stances of the breakup determine who legally owns the engagement ring.

925 days ago


And you know what?? The woman SHOULD return the ring! It is a vile, vindictive, and money grubbing whore that decides she deserves to keep a ring that most men have to work for to buy and then gets crushed when they break up. A wedding ring is an investment and if she decides not to pursue said investment, it gets returned. Plain and simple. And yes, I am a woman to think this.

925 days ago


IAN 90210

925 days ago

brown dynamite    

No "huge actor" would ever b1 and sue someone for a 90K ring. It's probably Pauly Shore.

925 days ago


I think it is Ian Ziering, despite his camp's public statements to the contrary. The most "high-profile" person she was with in 2003 was Ziering, and they were engaged. "Huge actor" my @$$ -- were they being snide about his waistline?

925 days ago


I dont know about you, but Ian Ziering is a huge actor? Umm, no he is not. He is more like a grade B or C actor. It has to be someone other than Ian.

924 days ago
Previous 15 Comments | 1 | 2 | 3 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

Around The Web