Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
The time is now 8:47 pm
You last visited November 24, 2014, 8:22 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Lawsuit over $315 million lottery jackpot goes to trial

Mega MillionsMega Millions: Lawsuit over $315 million lottery jackpot goes to trial

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.

AP

We'd love to see your comments here!  Register for a FREE membership — it takes just a few moments — and you'll be able to post comments here and on any of our forums. If you're already a member, you can Log In to post a comment.

37 comments. Last comment 8 years ago by dvdiva.
Page 1 of 3
loves2lotto's avatar - Lottery-029.jpg
Charlotte, North Carolina
United States
Member #36131
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.

    bellyache's avatar - 64x64a9wg

    United States
    Member #12618
    March 18, 2005
    2060 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: June 6, 2006, 8:48 pm - IP Logged

    What a shock. Roll Eyes

      Avatar
      nassau
      Bahamas
      Member #1369
      April 13, 2003
      73 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,Disapprove

        barbos's avatar - gold bar-and-cash1.jpg
        California
        United States
        Member #23908
        October 17, 2005
        122 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.

          Avatar
          New Member
          St. Louis
          United States
          Member #2341
          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 #16612
            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.

              RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
              mid-Ohio
              United States
              Member #9
              March 24, 2001
              18029 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.

              * you don't need more tickets, just the right ticket * 
              * your best chance at winning a lottery jackpot is to buy a ticket * 
                   Wink 

                justxploring's avatar - villiarna
                Wandering Aimlessly
                United States
                Member #25360
                November 5, 2005
                4458 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.

                I Agree!

                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.

                  Avatar
                  md
                  United States
                  Member #14047
                  April 20, 2005
                  541 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!

                    SassyOhio's avatar - Picture012
                    Columbus Ohio
                    United States
                    Member #35946
                    March 25, 2006
                    234 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: June 7, 2006, 11:25 am - IP Logged

                    And AGAIN lol that is why I state VERY CLEARLY in my Agreement to my Lottery Players in my pools that IF YOU DID NOT PAY FOR YOUR FUNDS BEFORE THE END OF THE WORK DAY FOR THE DAY OF THE DRAWING YOU WILL NOT BE ENTITLED TO ANTYHING AND I also had one lotto player stop playing this week and I revised my agreement to state on it what this Player had declined to continue playing and I will req notification IN WRITING For the date that she is planning on returning to the pool

                    AND I had her send me a email from her stating that she was no longer going to be playing til after summer and sent one back to REQ HER TO please  send me in writing that she wants back in and the date she wants back in on.. I do not PLAY with that crap..... I NOTE EVERYTHING if they dont like it they can join a different pool is the way that I look at it .. but the people in my pools love that I am this THORO because they KNOW that there protected against anyone taking ANY of THEIR money                                         

                    Party

                    Hopin To Be The Lucky Ones!!

                    COME ON MEGA! MEGA-ME-RICH!

                     

                    Please feel free to visit my sisters memorial page that I have now completed

                    www.freewebs.com/wendyinmyheartforever

                      bellyache's avatar - 64x64a9wg

                      United States
                      Member #12618
                      March 18, 2005
                      2060 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: June 7, 2006, 12:27 pm - IP Logged

                      And AGAIN lol that is why I state VERY CLEARLY in my Agreement to my Lottery Players in my pools that IF YOU DID NOT PAY FOR YOUR FUNDS BEFORE THE END OF THE WORK DAY FOR THE DAY OF THE DRAWING YOU WILL NOT BE ENTITLED TO ANTYHING AND I also had one lotto player stop playing this week and I revised my agreement to state on it what this Player had declined to continue playing and I will req notification IN WRITING For the date that she is planning on returning to the pool

                      AND I had her send me a email from her stating that she was no longer going to be playing til after summer and sent one back to REQ HER TO please  send me in writing that she wants back in and the date she wants back in on.. I do not PLAY with that crap..... I NOTE EVERYTHING if they dont like it they can join a different pool is the way that I look at it .. but the people in my pools love that I am this THORO because they KNOW that there protected against anyone taking ANY of THEIR money                                         

                      Party

                      Good for you SassyOhio. When you win a jackpot, you will be protected against people making false claims about being in the pool. Or at least you will have proof they weren't in it! =)

                        Avatar
                        NY
                        United States
                        Member #23835
                        October 16, 2005
                        2865 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: June 7, 2006, 4:49 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,Disapprove

                        The meaning of such an agreement seems crystal clear.  If the group had an agreement that "everyone would be included" whenever they (which means the whole group, and not just the part of the group that is present at any given time) bought tickets then everyone who was part of the group is included. Collecting the ticket money from somebody who isn't there when the rest of the group chips in for the tickets is just one of many details that don't invalidate the rest of the agreement. Whether or not there really was an agreement, and what the agreement was, is what the dispute is about. Seven people buying 21 tickets is a good indication that when they bought the tickets they didn't intend to share any winnings with an eighth person, but their intent at the time would be meaningless if there was a valid previous agreement.

                        Apparently this group didn't have a written agreement, and now they're getting exactly what they should have expected.

                          Avatar

                          United States
                          Member #34266
                          March 1, 2006
                          188 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: June 7, 2006, 6:46 pm - IP Logged

                          The only winners will be the lawyers.

                            Avatar
                            nassau
                            Bahamas
                            Member #1369
                            April 13, 2003
                            73 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: June 7, 2006, 7:25 pm - IP Logged

                            to me since he wasn't there to contribute he have NO RIGHT to any of the jackpot.