You last visited September 5, 2008, 11:00 pm
|
Lawsuit over $315 million lottery jackpot goes to trial
Lawsuit over $315 million lottery jackpot goes to trialPosted: 6/6/2006 7:06:02 PM  A California lab technician's lawsuit seeking a share of the $315 million Mega Millions multi-state lottery jackpot divvied up by seven co-workers will go to trial. Orange County Superior Court Judge Michael Brenner on Monday set an April 2 trial date for Jonathan De La Cruz's lawsuit against the seven winners. De La Cruz said he had been part of the group that bought lottery tickets, but was off the day they bought the winning ticket. His lawsuit, filed in December, contends the group had an oral agreement that everyone would be included whenever they pooled money to buy tickets. The winners — six lab technicians and a receptionist at the Kaiser Permanente medical office in Garden Grove — rejected De La Cruz's claims. They said it was the first time they had bought tickets together, and that it had been almost a year since any of them had pooled money with De La Cruz. The Nov. 15 jackpot was the second largest in state history and one of the largest in the United States. The winners, who each put in $3 for 21 tickets, opted for a lump-sum payment and each received about $21 million. Source: AP
Charlotte, North Carolina United States Member #36533 March 28, 2006 50 Posts Offline
|
| Posted: June 6, 2006, 8:15 pm - IP Logged |
|
His lawsuit, filed in December, contends the group had an oral agreement that everyone would be included whenever they pooled money to buy tickets. Yeah Right! That doesn't even make sense. He wasn't there, he didn't provide any money to pay for his share of the tickets. He gets NOTHING. By the way, if he was at work the day before he was off, why didn't he give them the money then? I mean he knew he had the next day off.
|
|
|
United States Member #12856 March 18, 2005 2060 Posts Offline
|
| Posted: June 6, 2006, 8:48 pm - IP Logged |
|
What a shock. 
|
|
|
nassau Bahamas Member #1395 April 13, 2003 71 Posts Offline
|
| Posted: June 6, 2006, 8:53 pm - IP Logged |
|
"the group had an oral agreement that everyone would be included whenever they pooled money to buy tickets." so he was not there to pooled his money so therefore I don't see why there is a court case,
|
|
|
California United States Member #24251 October 17, 2005 30 Posts Offline
|
| Posted: June 7, 2006, 12:00 am - IP Logged |
|
Sounds you don't know The Socialist Republic of California guys and believe me that jerk has a very good chances to win the case. It wouldn't happen i Ohio cause nobody would even know they won.
|
|
|
New Member St. Louis United States Member #2383 September 18, 2003 15 Posts Offline
|
| Posted: June 7, 2006, 1:15 am - IP Logged |
|
I run a lottery pool and work. Before every drawing, I provide copies of the tickets AND the name of everyone in the pool. I hope to God this idiot loses.
There's only two kinds of people that win the lottery, amigos....those that already have money and first time players.
|
|
|
|
United States Member #16902 June 2, 2005 3493 Posts Offline
|
| Posted: June 7, 2006, 1:35 am - IP Logged |
|
I hope the lawsuit comes to an end soon in favor of De La Cruz.
|
|
|
mid-Ohio United States Member #9 March 24, 2001 8976 Posts Offline
|
| Posted: June 7, 2006, 2:04 am - IP Logged |
|
If the date April 2 is right then this guy has successfully held up his co-workers getting all their money for another year or so. If the court accepts his version of the so-called oral agreement to share with everyone then everyone one in the work area of these lottery winners are entitled to a share of their winnings. This Jonathan De La Cruz is a lot like Betty Domingo of Lubbock, Texas http://www.lotterypost.com/news/135160.htm who sued all her co-worker for a share of their lottery winnings because one of the pool member didn't cover her when she didn't contribute money to the pool. There may be people here at LP who may be thinking by contributing ideas and posting numbers that they will be entitled to a share of any large jackpot won by another member if they can locate him. What happens most is most likely to happen again
|
|
|
Sunny SW Florida United States Member #25708 November 5, 2005 4068 Posts Offline
|
| Posted: June 7, 2006, 2:50 am - IP Logged |
|
If the date April 2 is right then this guy has successfully held up his co-workers getting all their money for another year or so. If the court accepts his version of the so-called oral agreement to share with everyone then everyone one in the work area of these lottery winners are entitled to a share of their winnings. This Jonathan De La Cruz is a lot like Betty Domingo of Lubbock, Texas http://www.lotterypost.com/news/135160.htm who sued all her co-worker for a share of their lottery winnings because one of the pool member didn't cover her when she didn't contribute money to the pool. There may be people here at LP who may be thinking by contributing ideas and posting numbers that they will be entitled to a share of any large jackpot won by another member if they can locate him. 
You hit that proverbial nail* on the head (ouch!) RJOh. I once gave in to someone who did not deserve some money not a lottery only because I didn't want to wait & battle it out in court. I always say I'd like to join a pool, but now I'm starting to change my mind. The other point you made is also well taken. If the courts rule in his favor, everyone who works there might then want their share. I don't think he'll win. *De spijker op de kop slaan is the Dutch Proverb I found. Ins Schwarze treffen (to hit in the black) comes from archery. I wasn't sure where that expression came from. Thought it was just an American cliche. Ah, what would I do without Google? I know, I'd be in bed sleeping.
|
|
|
md United States Member #14305 April 20, 2005 436 Posts Offline
|
| Posted: June 7, 2006, 9:03 am - IP Logged |
|
This fool will not win. Any judge and or jury in his/her right mind would know that when Jackpots hit those large numbers like $300,000,000, that someone in a pool will do everything in their power to continue pooling their monies. Short of him attending a love one's funeral, to miss work and miss making your pool contribution is ludicrious at best! All you rooters for the underdog supporters, he is not an underdog, and furthermore, put yourself in the 7 winners shoes. How the hell would you feel for someone to drag you through a legal process after such an exciting moment in your life - all because they are rooten on the inside with greed, jeaolousy and envy! Think on it! You wouldn't like it one bit!
|
|
|
|