You can’t put a price on love, but you can put a price on a breakup: $100,000.

Ryan Strasser, an associate with Troutman Sanders law firm in Washington, D.C., filed a lawsuit on Monday in the U.S. District Court in D.C. against his former fiancée, Sarah Jones Dickens, asking for the return of a 4.06-carat, $100,000 engagement ring, which he called a “conditional gift,” according to court documents. The couple was due to be married earlier this year and their relationship is outlined in sometimes excruciating detail.

The couple met as college classmates at Duke University in 2004 and started dating in 2015, the court filing states. Strasser earned a law degree and a Master of Public Administration, while Dickens studied art history in Cambodia and later enrolled in a Ph.D. program at Duke. They moved in together in December 2015. The following year, the beaming couple was photographed at a Modern Luxury magazine social event.

Their prospective wedding registry at TheKnot.com is listed as an exhibit in the suit, as are their engagement photos on Facebook FB, +2.12% . Their registry included a $2,798 “rosewood slub velvet leonelle sofa” from the upscale clothing and lifestyle store Anthropologie URBN, -0.09% and $12 “Highland Hooks” (since reduced to $3.95). The engagement photographs show the couple holding hands, strolling through a snowy winter wonderland in a wooded area of Beaver Creek, Col. in February 2017.

“ ‘Every lawsuit tells a story. But this one is a soap opera, a country-western song and a cautionary tale. In rich, painful (and possibly unnecessary) detail, Strasser lays out his version of how he was wronged.’ ” — Jenna Greene, editor of The Litigation Daily

It’s one of many filings in recent years concerning diamond rings and broken engagements. In 2016, Bradley Moss successfully sued his former fiancée for the return of his $125,000 engagement ring. The marriage was called off after the rehearsal dinner at the Water Grill in Union Square allegedly turned sour when the families became embroiled in a heated argument. Similar cases have involved rings ranging in value from $19,000 to $250,000.

“The bigger the ring, the bigger the problem,” said Michael Stutman, managing partner at Stutman, Stutman & Lichtenstein in New York and past president of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, New York. So who owns the ring? Family law varies from state to state, but in New York City and Washington, D.C. the gift of an engagement ring only becomes complete at the wedding ceremony, he said. In some states, including Montana, an engagement ring is an unconditional gift and does not need to be returned. (Stutman is not representing either party in the case.)

Strasser’s lawsuit details the evolution and eventual disintegration of the relationship in chilling legalese. “Defendant accepted the ring and the marriage proposal upon which the offer of the ring was predicated,” the suit states. “Roughly 11 months later, the parties’ marriage plans collapsed with a highly contentious break up that ended their engagement.” (Strasser and Dickens did not respond to several requests for comment. Strasser’s lawyer did not respond to request for comment.)

The court filing includes many personal details from Strasser-Dickens relationship. “Every lawsuit is a fight. Every lawsuit tells a story. But this one is a soap opera, a country-western song—and a cautionary tale,” said Jenna Greene, the San Francisco-based editor of The Litigation Daily, who first reported the case. “In rich, painful (and possibly unnecessary) detail, Strasser lays out his version of how he was wronged.”

Expensive engagement rings are a recent phenomenon

Big diamonds weren’t always part of the marriage ritual. The social expectation for engagement rings was actually created by jewelry and diamond companies in the first half of the 20th century, and it later became a tradition in movies. Giving a diamond ring to mark an engagement goes back to the “A Diamond is Forever” campaign by the DeBeers diamond company, which trademarked the sentiment. It was written by copywriter Frances Gerety in 1947.

In his suit, Strasser claims in the suit that Dickens insisted that she deserved a “large” engagement ring because she did not believe in wasting money on a wedding and, for that reason, the couple should hold a smaller wedding and, instead, spend “extra” on an engagement ring, “something she would enjoy daily for the rest of her married life.” Strasser and Dickens then had a “preliminary discussion” about the parameters of an engagement ring.

Initially, Strasser wanted to spend no more than $40,000 on the ring. “Defendant stated that whatever she would eventually want likely would cost more than that,” according to the court filing. Following “multiple trips to several jewelers,” Dickens allegedly told Strasser she preferred an engagement ring of around 3.5 to 5 carats “with an inclusion rating of no ‘worse’ than VS2 and a color rating of no ‘worse’ than G,” ratings that indicate the quality of the diamond,” the suit states.

“ Sarah Jones Dickens advised that her diamond could have no florescence and wanted an ‘Old European Cut’ diamond, which is cut using a manufacturing process in the early part of the 1900s, according to the court filing. ”

Dickens had a very detailed vision for her ideal ring, the suit claims. “She also advised that her diamond could have no florescence” and wanted an “Old European Cut diamond, a type of diamond cut using a manufacturing process in the early part of the 1900s that has since fallen out of fashion due to improved diamond-cutting technology,” according to the court filing.

Although Strasser told Dickens that $99,800 exceeded his budget for the ring, he acquiesced and agreed to buy the ring from Betteridge jewelry store in Greenwich, Conn. At Dickens’s request, Strasser had the ring re-certified in December 2016 to ensure it had not suffered any damage since its previous certification in 2012. (Strasser also took out a $30,000 personal loan through online lender Social Finance Inc. (SoFi) at an interest rate of 5.95% per annum to help pay for the ring.)

Not many Americans spend $100,000 on a ring. Americans are either cheap or thrifty. Some 36% of people say couples should spend at least $1,000 on an engagement ring and 19% say you should spend between $1,000 and $2,999, according to a 2016 survey of more than 5,000 people by personal-finance site GoBankingRates.com. However, 45% said you should spend more than that. In fact, a large portion of those believe money should be no object.

It’s also rare for a couple to go Dutch on an engagement ring. One-third of couples hunt for ring styles together, according to a survey by TheKnot.com, a wedding website, and 70% of brides are aware of how much their partner spent on the ring, but only 8% of grooms actually decided on a ring budget together with their partner. The average a couple or prospective groom spends on an engagement ring increased to $6,351 last year, up from $5,095 in 2011.

The suit alleges Strasser was the breadwinner

Strasser’s lawsuit further alleges that Dickens did not contribute to the mortgage or expenses during that phase of their relationship. Strasser was the “sole breadwinner from the beginning to the end of their cohabitation,” while Dickens was not employed in either a full-time or part-time capacity and thus had no income,” according to the court filings. The relationship soured and, “after a particularly dramatic weekend on Sunday, Jan. 7, 2018,” it officially ended.

“ ‘For both of our sakes, I look forward to completing this uncomfortable process as amicably as possible, to putting this process behind us, and to focusing on the next chapter of our lives.’ ” — Ryan Strasser writing in an email to his ex-girlfriend Sarah Jones Dickens

During their time together, the suit says Strasser adopted two rescue dogs and Dickens had a dog of her own, which she had adopted prior to their moving in together. But the relationship appeared to go downhill from there. “Over the next several months, the living space available in the unit proved difficult for the parties and the three dogs,” it adds.

“The wedding band is considered marital property,” says Jacqueline Newman, a managing partner at Berkman, Bottger, Newman & Rodd in New York. “If it’s marital property, it’s subject to division. If you get divorced a month later, she still gets to keep the engagement ring. I often joke with my male friends, ‘Spend more money on the wedding ring than the engagement ring.’” (Newman is not representing either party in the case.)

There is quite a lot of personal correspondence in the suit to show that the couple had made plans to get married, including an email from March 14, 2017 from the Park Hyatt in Beaver Creek, where Strasser and Dickens were planning to host their wedding, which was scheduled to take place earlier earlier this year. “Congratulations on your engagement!” the email reads. “What a beautiful time of year to be married and exciting for your guests.”

Strasser recounts one poignant scene after their breakup when his father was sent to retrieve his dogs and the ring. In a Jan. 9 email, Strasser alleges that Dickens and her mother told his father that they had decided that the ring would not be returned under any circumstances. When Strasser’s father attempted to retrieve the dogs, Strasser wrote to Dickens, “You refused to hand over Tyus, holding him in your arms.”

In that email to Dickens, Strasser implored her to return the engagement ring, noting that the appraised value of the diamond was now closer to $125,000. He hinted that the already acrimonious situation would escalate if the ring was not returned. “For both of our sakes,” he wrote. “I look forward to completing this uncomfortable process as amicably as possible, to putting this process behind us, and to focusing on the next chapter of our lives.”