Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: TUESDAY, November 16, 1993                   TAG: 9311160095
SECTION: NATL/INTL                    PAGE: A-1   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: By Chicago Tribune
DATELINE: CHICAGO                                LENGTH: Medium

SAID JILTED LAWYER TO EX-LOVE: I DO SUE

As in "Let's just be . . ." or "I hope we can be . . ."

Those phrases once produced tears, tantrums and more than a few angry phone calls. Maybe even a threat or two.

The stakes apparently are getting higher now, after a federal jury in Chicago last week awarded a woman $178,000 because her fiance ended their seven-week engagement.

The stunning decision, and the suit itself, have more than a few legal experts and romantics scratching their heads.

"I think it's a pretty sad state of affairs, pretty pathetic," said Paige Greytok, president of Selective Search Inc., an executive matchmaking service in Chicago. "While I can understand emotional duress, are you going to be able to sue your parents if you don't like your Christmas present?

"Dating and love and engagement should be fun, a time when you can find out about another person," she said; " . . . until they say, `Hey, you didn't kiss me tonight. That's going to cost you $3,000.' "

Jurors found that wealthy Oregon rancher Richard Austin Springs III, 50, violated the Illinois Breach of Promise Act last year when he sent a postcard abruptly breaking off marriage plans with attorney Sharon Wildey, 50, of Chicago. The jury awarded Wildey $93,000 for pain and suffering, $60,000 for the loss of income from her law practice and $25,000 for psychiatric counseling expenses.

In his postcard, Springs expressed the hope that he and Wildey could remain, yes, friends. He also said she could keep the engagement ring, bought for $19,000, and could use $10,000 in his Chicago bank account "to help you through these times."

For the record, Wildey has put her diamond-and-sapphire ring up for sale at a Chicago jewelry store.

As a result of the breakup, Wildey testified, she couldn't bring herself to tell friends about the split, fell into a deep depression, struggled to work and even had trouble talking.

"This jury has sent a message we're past gender bias," said Terence Flynn, Wildey's lawyer, when he was asked after the verdict if he had been concerned by the jury's makeup, seven men and one woman.

Wildey had sought $365,000 in damages.

So, will cold cash and the courts confound the course of true love?

"If you promise somebody something, you could wind up giving them money," said Dan Reid, a Hammond, Ind., resident who has been engaged two weeks. "You've got to watch yourself. There's lots of ways for people to try and get money."

And, of course, lots of ways to stop them.

First there were prenuptial agreements, which asked brides and grooms to contemplate the nasty financial details of divorce before they even got married.

Might this case push things even further? If so, can pre-going-steady agreements or a statute of limitations on love be far off?

Many of those who ride matrimonial coattails, or litigate them, called the suit and award ridiculous. It's no fun getting dumped, they said, but it's a lame reason to sue.

Still, few people seem to believe the decision is likely to change the face of courtship, love or marriage. In the end, it might not even change legal standards; it may be reversed or reduced on appeal.

Kitty Wall, manager of Fred Fox Studios in Clarendon Hills, Ill., which takes a lot of wedding photos, said it's not uncommon for ceremonies to be called off.

"I mean it's horrible, but when you're young, you get your heart broken all the time."

Many people interviewed thought the couple took marriage too lightly. Wildey and Springs were engaged within two months of meeting. At best, said some, Springs should have paid any wedding bills the couple already had run up.

"I'm the type of person who if they broke it off would even pay 50 percent of the costs because I was stupid enough to want to marry him and he was a jerk," said Barbara Andersen, who is to be the matron of honor at her sister's upcoming wedding.

Some thought Wildey was looking for somebody to blame, especially since she has already been divorced three times.

"If you're at the point where you're suing, I do think you've lost perspective on the situation," said Deborah Stonich, whose fiance broke their engagement last year. "If a person is affecting you that much, I question how much sense of self you could have."

But Stonich, a La Grange Park, Ill., environmental attorney, also said the verdict is more likely an aberration than the start of a trend.

Springs' attorney said he has not decided whether to appeal, and, aside from a terse statement issued through Wildey's lawyer, neither party has commented publicly.