Joint tenancy in contemplation of marriage

I deeded joint tenancy to my fiance in my home (about $100,000 in total equity) in contemplation of marriage without a written contract about the conditional status of the gift. She admits in depositiion "it was contingent on being together at the beginning". My coworker asked me why I would give her half my house & she (the coworker) signed an affidavit stating my response that I said " I am going to marry her" . Now my ex-fiance says I said in 2006 just before I deeded the equity that I was content "with the way things were just living together" (not true at all). We have pictures of both of us wearing engagement rings with her arm around me on Dec. 31, 2007. Yes, I wore a gold band from my deceased grandfather as a future wedding ring in order to please her during our engagement. Ex-fiance alleges (very untrue) abuse (pushing & verbal abuse) in 2007 & now says she no longer would marry me starting at some undefined point in 2007 , but would have married me in 2006 before signing the quit claim joint tenancy deed. We got engaged on July 10,2003 & she opted out of the engagement June2,2008and moved out June 4,2008. Our marriage date was delayed due to college aid requirements for her children (my income was too high to have her 2 girls get grants & scholarships). During our cohabitation I gave her around $33,700 in retail value for absolute gifts for Christmas, Valentine's day & her birthday. I paid for the $33,000 down payment on the house I bought before she moved in ,and before during & after or cohabitation all mortgage payments, all household insurance, all utilities,all real estate taxes on the house, paid her $1400 per month for 10 months to finish her RN degree, paid off (a loan & not gift, but I could not prove it was a loan) on her Visa card for $2,000 (another loan that I could not prove) & her debt of $2500 to her former lover (also loan I have a witness to) & gave her over $8200 in dental services, gave her a late model car to use for 2 1/2 years & paid the insurance on it for that time, co-signed $20,0000 in college loans for her daughter (who is still current on them), paid for over $55,000 in household improvements. She asked to borrow money or stole from my wallet for weekly lunches estimated at over $2000 for our 58 month living arangement. She never paid any of this borrowed or stolen money back to me. Total on above items EXCLUDING the absolute holiday & birthday gifts was over $167,000 over the full 58 month relationship. She paid for about 1/4 of the groceries for the household that included either one or two of her children & a $960 bill for electrical wiring for an above ground pool that she bought & I paid to have installed. A pool that I never wanted or used (it is now 99% drained and a mosquito trap if not chlorinated often). The court said she was not unjustly enriched for any of the above items because the judge said he was treating it as if we were married and these were all absolute gifts in our summary judgement hearing.
Her son viewed adult homosexual nudity on the internet & made hard copies that I found & both her son & daughter had people coming in & out of the house at all hours, hosted underage drinking parties & heterosexual & homosexual sleep overs at the house every time we went on vacation. Prior to this relationship that I had with my fiance, her son was arrested for sexually molesting a small child within my ex-fiance's business & my fiance lost her business license in Wisconsin as a result of his illegal behavior. All these things were forbidden by me & tolerated by their mother ( no discipline was ever done by their mother other than her "talking it over with them") . I begged to have everone in the house lock the doors when not home & at night, but it was almost never done. I also asked repeatedly that her children's friends knock before barging into the house at all hours .Her chilren's friends stole expensive jewelry & clothing from her repeatedly due to the open door policy that was allowed by everyone except me. I was obviously not their father & felt it was there mother's responsibility to dscipline them, but she never did. Their mother bought the children cell phones and cars & paid their insurance on the cars & the monthly cell phone bills for her children. Her 17 year old daughter occasionally had her boyfriend sleeping over with her in her bed & her homosexual son (when 16 & 17 of age also had his boyfriend sleeping over in his bed). I had to tell her children's sleep over partners to get out when I discovered this activity. It became a flop house & a party house for her children. Obviously incredibly intolerable.
The court delayed a decision in a summary judgement request to deed the equity back to me pending briefs by the attorneys to determine if it is elligible for a jury trial. My lawyer has also made a motion in limite to limit testimony to no fault as per the statute requirement of " no fault" in Wisconsin (I obviously live in Wisconsin) that says "no fault " applies equally to divorce and broken engagements. The judge has also delayed determination on this request for the motion in limite.
A case I know of that relates well to unjust enrichment of this senario, but of less financial magnitute is Ward vs Jahnke. My attorney prefers Brown vs. Thomas & the judge has apparently not acknowleged either case .
Do you think it is elligible for a jury trail & do you think I have a good case to get half of my home equity back ? Do you think the judge can not rule in favor of the motion in limite ? I also want to ask for a reconsideration of the $2500 loan payoff to ex-borfriend that was not a gift, but a loan, documented in an affidavit by a third person & I want my home equity returned based on three things: unjust enrichment, a gift in contemplation of marriage, & also that it was documented to be a conditional gift "contingent on being together" as my ex-fiance stated in her deposition.
If I do not get my house equity back in reconsideration or at trial I plan to appeal it.
Please do not tell me how stupid as I know this already. Love is blind & the mess that lead to the broken engagement is an eye opener.

Sorry to hear of this situation.

Sadly, fifty percent of your posting is irrelevant to the issue at hand. Her kid watching nasty stuff in your home isn't relevant to the fact she is walking off with half your equity. It is unfortunate, but it isn't relevant. In fact, your stating all the other things you did, forking over tons of cash, allowing unacceptable behavior, etc. actually SUPPORTS the idea that you very well may have signed over half the house---in other words, what you are saying in your posting SUPPORTS her contention that you signed over half the equity just because you're a nice guy--why in fact, he was always doing stuff like that for us!! (She says happily) and you AGREE by listing all the things you did that any rational person would not willingly do............. understand?

The rest of your posting is rhetorical----this means no one here can predict what will happen or if you will get a jury trial. If I were your attorney, I am not sure I would WANT a jury trial-----the odds of getting a woman on the jury who has been scorned and wants to stick it to you is HUGE, in my book. A bench trial would be more objective, I think........and quicker, too, I suspect.

In any regard, you seem to have a case under way with an attorney--asking him or her these questions would benefit you so much more since they are more familiar with those laws more relevant to your jurisdiction.

Thank you for your prompt & candid reply. I made a few edits in the original writing. Can you check it over again ? I am surmising by your statement about irrelevance that we should get our motion to limit testimony to no fault to illiminate allegations of abuse & other heartbalm at trial ?

If I understand what you are saying, your attorney, like me does not necessarily see the relevance of the dirty movies, the objectionable behavior that went on, etc. This is why he is heading toward "no fault" grounds which means, simplified that your comments about what she allowed as a parent are irrelevant as are her comments alleging verbal abuse, etc.

I am interested in your take on the relevance of the fact they watched dirty movies in your house and your deeding your property over to her? The fact they did objectionable things seems as though it would have been a warning to you that the decision you are going to make is a poor decison. The fact that they used you so liberally and you did not voice any objection does, in my opinion, dilute your position which is that this was a gift contingent upon a subsequent agreement, not unlike an engagement ring would be contingent upon the marriage to follow.

If this behavior was so "intolerable", why would you deed the woman half of the house? (you don't have to answer that----its rhetorical).........Bringing all of that into the discussion clouds the issue of intent with the deeding of the house. It is all contingent upon your intent---was it a contract entered into as a contingency, so to speak, contingent upon the marriage? Tossing in all of the other things really weakens the legitimacy of your position. I, like your attorney, would head into "no fault" grounds as well.