Would a ring be a conditional gift for an engagement to an already legally married woman?
Yes. I doubt the marital status of the woman has anything to do with considering an engagement ring a conditional gift.
How can you be engaged to a woman thats already married and living with her husband?
Again, the marital status of the woman has nothing to do with it. Married woman can date other men, sleep with them, and even promise to marry them. They must divorce their husbands before getting married again, but engagements are legal.
And the proposal was not accepted. The case cited doesnt have any bearing on this one.
The proposal not being accepted is the most important fact. Due to an engagement ring being a conditional gift, refusing the proposal should result in the return of the ring. The Roy Williams case was more favorable for the woman. He had a two-year relationship with the woman. They got engaged, and then they called off the engagement. And he's arguing that he's still entitled to the return of the ring. The article says that the pertinent issue is which person terminated the engagement.
In this case, there was only a short, online relationship. There was an implicit proposal by leaving the ring, which CB's wife has refused. The OM has a much better case than Roy Williams for demanding the return of the ring.
I'm talking about the stalking and harassment that the OM has done that is causing the mental anguish to the wife, husband, and children.
Right. I understand that CB, his wife, and his family are upset by the OM's actions. But I don't see how they rise to the level of harassment that would require remuneration. So far, the police and his attorneys haven't even been able to get a restraining order against the other man because he hasn't threatened them or trespassed.
Fortunately, this discussion is moot because CB has two lawyers who are advising him. I'm only discussing things from my limited understanding of the law and based on how I would vote were I on a jury in such a case. I don't want to leave statements unchallenged that another person may read and believe that the law provides, or requires, something that it doesn't.