I believe they won 6.6 million (first line top of page)

That's what I thought of, too. I couldn't find it through the forum search though. Used a search engine.

Incorporating and such, bah. - Seems to me a way of keeping the lawyers in business. People shouldn't have to jump through those kinds of legal hoops to maintain their privacy.  After the Lindberg Baby case, no 'official' should ever be allowed to say "No one could have seen it coming."

ONLY in Washington State right now would this happen... Mainly due to the current Governor that is in office. SHe has allowed so many wrong doings to go on, just wondering if perhaps she is getting some type of kick back off this as well as all the others that you hear about. If the REAL Governor was in office (DINO) this never would have been allowed to happen. This si the only state I am aware of that you cannot remain anonymous when you win a lottery. If I ever do win, I do not want people to know it, because you will get people coming out of the wood work asking for money. Or even sueing you, saying you promised them money. Or even like the one person said, kidnapping, murder and what ever else is in those sick minds. The judge definately be held liable for anything that happens due to his stupidity. I think we need to RE-ELECT DINO ROSSI.....

Um, you could always check the "Related Stories" box inside the news story.

People can want a change without having to stop playing the lottery. There is nothing wrong with trying to change the system. Also, coming into millions of dollars and earning it slowly is totally different. For some reason, some people think that it is ok to harass or beg lottery winners for their money because it wasn't really earned. So no, I don't see it as being the same.

I did not compare a trust to a corporation.  I am not an attorney and would never say which is better for any particular person.  I compared claiming the prize as "Joe Citizen" vs. claiming as a corp.

Also, I don't see anything here that impacts the corporation that claimed the previous jackpot.  You are comparing apples and oranges.

People have every right to try to protect themselves from thieves, credit hounds, and unscrupulous service providers.

It was smarter (or maybe just luckier)  to use a corporation because the lottery doesn't seem to have an interest in releasing the names of the actual people who are receiving the money, at least so far. As you say, it's possible that th elottery will  now want to release the names os the people behind the corporation. Since the corporation and the trust are both legal entities, I'm not sure why there is a disparity in how they are treated. If the rules require that the name of a natural person must be released when claiming a lottery prize it shouldn't matter whether those persons claimed through a trust or a corporation. If the rules only say that the name of the claimant must be released, it seems that the name of a trust should suffice. Since the judge is quoted as saying the public has a right to know the real people behind the trust,  it's certainly possible that the lottery could decide they want to release the names of those benefitting from the corporation. Even if the lottery doesn't press the issue it's possible that a FOIA request from the press could result in the same thing.

I wonder if the winners shot themselves in the foot by getting the injunction and seeking a court case. If they had simply formed the trust and claimed as the trust, perhaps the lottery would simply have listed the name of the trust and left it at that.

thanks ky floyd,

thats the crux of why i posted, what was the difference between the successful annononymous claim a few weeks earlier , and thiis claim.

I think the trick is to follow the correct proccedure.