Widow and daughter will split estate of poisoned $1 million lotto winner

Dec 13, 2013, 9:27 am (41 comments)

Illinois Lottery

The estate of a Chicago man who was poisoned to death right after he won $1 million on a scratch-off lottery ticket will be split between his widow and his daughter from a previous marriage, ending a fight in court.

The settlement was confirmed Thursday by a lawyer for the widow. The widow and daughter agreed not to sue each other for wrongful death unless a criminal investigation yields new information.

A medical examiner ruled in March that the lottery winner, Urooj Khan, was killed by cyanide poisoning. The medical examiner said that he could not determine how the cyanide was administered.

Khan died in July 2012, just before he was to collect a check from the Illinois lottery for $424,000 — the winnings after taxes and after Khan chose a one-time payment. He did not leave a will.

His death was ruled natural at first, but a brother raised suspicions, and authorities tested fluids taken from the body before Khan was buried. Those fluids showed the poisoning.

In January, authorities dug up the body to do a full autopsy in hopes of finding further evidence, but the exhumation yielded no significant clues. The death is classified as a homicide, but investigators have been tight-lipped.

The widow and daughter then fought in court over the division of Khan's property, as he left no will.

Under the settlement, the widow, Shabana Ansari, will get a third of the lottery money, and will keep three dry-cleaning shops that she owned with Khan. The Chicago Tribune reported that the shops are worth about $1 million.

The daughter, Jasmeen, will get the rest of the lottery money, plus five condominiums that were owned by Khan. Those are valued at about $250,000 together, The Tribune reported.

Al-Haroon Husain, a lawyer for the widow, told NBC News that he did not expect his client and the daughter to reconcile.

"I really wish they could," he said. "There has been a death, and the death has been under unusual circumstances. Both sides are pointing fingers at each other. It's very tough to reconcile."

A lawyer for the daughter did not immediately return a call for comment.

Khan, an Indian immigrant, came to Chicago in the 1980s and opened his first dry-cleaning shop in 2004. He bought the lottery ticket at a Chicago 7-Eleven, scratched it off and said later that he was so giddy at what he found that he tipped the clerk $100.

News story photo(Click to display full-size in gallery)

AP

Comments

Jon D's avatarJon D

R.I.P. Mr. Khan.

He should have claimed anonymously and opted out of publicity, then maybe he would still be ...

... whoops, may not have helped, as most people are murdered by relatives or people they know.

dr65's avatardr65

Well, I guess it doesn't matter who killed him...just so they get the money and property straightened out.

That's priority alright.

One of them must have done it, why are they getting ANYTHING at all?

fwlawrence's avatarfwlawrence

What split did the lawyers get?

DDOH937's avatarDDOH937

Quote: Originally posted by Jon D on Dec 13, 2013

R.I.P. Mr. Khan.

He should have claimed anonymously and opted out of publicity, then maybe he would still be ...

... whoops, may not have helped, as most people are murdered by relatives or people they know.

Why do you people always say that????? Really??? Do you not already know that that there are ONLY 6 States that allows for winners to collect anonymously???? I hate when people get on this garbage about why did he/she/they let the public know. Just in case you're not aware, the ONLY states that allow anonymous claims are : Delaware, Kansas, Maryland, Ohio, South Carolina and North Dakota. I really can't understand why people still dont get this. And in some cases, some States REQUIRE a press conference before can get your cash. Get off it people, most winners have no choice so they simply bite the bullet and figure they'll go public and get it over with since its getting out regardless.

 

Rest In Peace Mr. Khan. It seems you were a hard worker and a business man who took chances and was able to aquire a few assets for yourself. Good on you.

Jon D's avatarJon D

Quote: Originally posted by DDOH937 on Dec 13, 2013

Why do you people always say that????? Really??? Do you not already know that that there are ONLY 6 States that allows for winners to collect anonymously???? I hate when people get on this garbage about why did he/she/they let the public know. Just in case you're not aware, the ONLY states that allow anonymous claims are : Delaware, Kansas, Maryland, Ohio, South Carolina and North Dakota. I really can't understand why people still dont get this. And in some cases, some States REQUIRE a press conference before can get your cash. Get off it people, most winners have no choice so they simply bite the bullet and figure they'll go public and get it over with since its getting out regardless.

 

Rest In Peace Mr. Khan. It seems you were a hard worker and a business man who took chances and was able to aquire a few assets for yourself. Good on you.

DDOH937's avatarDDOH937

Quote: Originally posted by Jon D on Dec 13, 2013

Big Grin Unless you claim as a Trust, which is allowed in most states, including Illinois.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-11-06/news/ct-met-anonymous-lottery-20111106_1_lottery-winners-illinois-lottery-lottery-jackpot

Fair enough. Thanks for the post/link. I know that some States allow winners to form LLC/TRUSTS but still their name has to be disclosed publicly. Thanks for sharing this though. Very much appreciated.

Jon D's avatarJon D

Quote: Originally posted by DDOH937 on Dec 13, 2013

Fair enough. Thanks for the post/link. I know that some States allow winners to form LLC/TRUSTS but still their name has to be disclosed publicly. Thanks for sharing this though. Very much appreciated.

No problem.

Also, my post was facetious, joking that claiming anonymously would not help you if you are poisoned by your wife. Dead

dr65's avatardr65

He only won a million dollars...less than that total take. It's not enough to be a constant figure in the public eye, there are new

and bigger winners all the time to take the attention off the latest winner. $1 Million is enough for some evil family member to

do away with your hind-end...and some would do it for a lot less. I don't think that staying in the shadows or remaining an unknown

would have helped him in any way. No one wants to bother a millionaire, there's not enough to go around. Sooo, keep it in the

family, poison the winner, try and get away with it and live it up for a short time. Is it really worth someone's LIFE? No. Greed

is funny, it clouds judgement...it creates monsters and murderer's...I hope they find out who killed him (I'm sure they must

know already...it said they're being tight lipped..) I hope they get a long, long time to think about what they did and curse the

day they got it in their mind to kill someone for a crummy $400k or so.

DDOH937's avatarDDOH937

Quote: Originally posted by Jon D on Dec 13, 2013

No problem.

Also, my post was facetious, joking that claiming anonymously would not help you if you are poisoned by your wife. Dead

hahahahaha, true. Imagine spening money on lawyers ect, hiding from the public and then going home where pure evil awaits. Oooohh, guess what i just thought, maybe him going public was calculated because his knew/suspected his fate? A bit Machiavellian on my part but who knows. Either way, sad. But here's what i'm thinking, why kill him for a mere $400K when he has businesses and condos worth a combined $3 million plus? Hmmmm, interesting....

Jon D's avatarJon D

Quote: Originally posted by DDOH937 on Dec 13, 2013

hahahahaha, true. Imagine spening money on lawyers ect, hiding from the public and then going home where pure evil awaits. Oooohh, guess what i just thought, maybe him going public was calculated because his knew/suspected his fate? A bit Machiavellian on my part but who knows. Either way, sad. But here's what i'm thinking, why kill him for a mere $400K when he has businesses and condos worth a combined $3 million plus? Hmmmm, interesting....

People have killed for less. Murderers are dumb.

Actually, I was wondering why 5 condos only totalled $250,000 together. Real estate in Chicago must really be in the crapper, or those places must be real slummy.

DDOH937's avatarDDOH937

Quote: Originally posted by Jon D on Dec 13, 2013

People have killed for less. Murderers are dumb.

Actually, I was wondering why 5 condos only totalled $250,000 together. Real estate in Chicago must really be in the crapper, or those places must be real slummy.

Must have been a typo, i thought it read "$250,000 EACH!! But just saw that it actually read $250,000 together. Interesting..

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

I bet the wife's back in court within a year facing murder charges.

DDOH937's avatarDDOH937

Quote: Originally posted by Jon D on Dec 13, 2013

Big Grin Unless you claim as a Trust, which is allowed in most states, including Illinois.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-11-06/news/ct-met-anonymous-lottery-20111106_1_lottery-winners-illinois-lottery-lottery-jackpot

Hey Jon D, just got some very very valuable information. The claiming of prizes using Trusts/LLC's in Illinois is ONLY permitted if the LLC or Trust was formed BEFORE winning. That is, you had a Trusts/LLC set up or established PRIOR to even purchasing the winning ticket. Quite crazy if you ask me. I just contacted the Illinois lottery headquarters to enquire for myself. (i'm like that, i try to do my own research whenever possible). But thanks for the info, it lead me to doing a bit of research and to dig deeper. All the States have all these crazy rules.

MDguy

Quote: Originally posted by DDOH937 on Dec 13, 2013

Why do you people always say that????? Really??? Do you not already know that that there are ONLY 6 States that allows for winners to collect anonymously???? I hate when people get on this garbage about why did he/she/they let the public know. Just in case you're not aware, the ONLY states that allow anonymous claims are : Delaware, Kansas, Maryland, Ohio, South Carolina and North Dakota. I really can't understand why people still dont get this. And in some cases, some States REQUIRE a press conference before can get your cash. Get off it people, most winners have no choice so they simply bite the bullet and figure they'll go public and get it over with since its getting out regardless.

 

Rest In Peace Mr. Khan. It seems you were a hard worker and a business man who took chances and was able to aquire a few assets for yourself. Good on you.

I wonder if you can wear a ninja mask to the press conferences.

sully16's avatarsully16

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Dec 13, 2013

I bet the wife's back in court within a year facing murder charges.

I'd back you on that bet, thought the same thing myself, just not enough evidence yet.

mrcraft's avatarmrcraft

Quote: Originally posted by DDOH937 on Dec 13, 2013

Hey Jon D, just got some very very valuable information. The claiming of prizes using Trusts/LLC's in Illinois is ONLY permitted if the LLC or Trust was formed BEFORE winning. That is, you had a Trusts/LLC set up or established PRIOR to even purchasing the winning ticket. Quite crazy if you ask me. I just contacted the Illinois lottery headquarters to enquire for myself. (i'm like that, i try to do my own research whenever possible). But thanks for the info, it lead me to doing a bit of research and to dig deeper. All the States have all these crazy rules.

In California, the Lottery has stated in their winner's handbook that even if you claim your prize through a trust, names are still public record and disclosable. Now what I don't know is whether that disclosable name is the name of trustee (usually an attorney) or the name of the winner themselves contained in the trust.

rock_nc's avatarrock_nc

Quote: Originally posted by sully16 on Dec 13, 2013

I'd back you on that bet, thought the same thing myself, just not enough evidence yet.

who would want him dead the most? why would they want him dead? His last meal would point to the wife! The daughter might have been pissed because of their Relegion, her dad might have been keeping her from going out and dating, Living out the American dream! If they searched the home, and could not find a trace of the poison, maybe it points to someone else in the Family! that's just my 2 cents!!!!!

KY Floyd's avatarKY Floyd

Quote: Originally posted by DDOH937 on Dec 13, 2013

Hey Jon D, just got some very very valuable information. The claiming of prizes using Trusts/LLC's in Illinois is ONLY permitted if the LLC or Trust was formed BEFORE winning. That is, you had a Trusts/LLC set up or established PRIOR to even purchasing the winning ticket. Quite crazy if you ask me. I just contacted the Illinois lottery headquarters to enquire for myself. (i'm like that, i try to do my own research whenever possible). But thanks for the info, it lead me to doing a bit of research and to dig deeper. All the States have all these crazy rules.

I suspect that it always come sdowns to how cooperative the lottery wants to be.

Whenever I see anything about it, there's always a reference to a requirement that the "winner" attend a press conference, or that the "winner's" name is considered public information. So who's the winner when the prize is claimed by a legal entity that didn't buy the ticket? How could any entity that didn't even exist when the ticket became a winning ticket have any rights to the ticket until after the ticket is worth enough that there are tax issues?

Based on the phrasing of the rules, I think the lotteries have a decent argument that the winner is either the person that actually bought the ticket or the entity the ticket was transferred to before it became a winning ticket. Once a legal entity wins, a subsequent owner of the ticket is not the winner.

Jon D's avatarJon D

Quote: Originally posted by DDOH937 on Dec 13, 2013

Hey Jon D, just got some very very valuable information. The claiming of prizes using Trusts/LLC's in Illinois is ONLY permitted if the LLC or Trust was formed BEFORE winning. That is, you had a Trusts/LLC set up or established PRIOR to even purchasing the winning ticket. Quite crazy if you ask me. I just contacted the Illinois lottery headquarters to enquire for myself. (i'm like that, i try to do my own research whenever possible). But thanks for the info, it lead me to doing a bit of research and to dig deeper. All the States have all these crazy rules.

That doesn't sound right, I think you may have been misinformed.

I've only had limited experience with our own lottery customer service here in CA, but when I did I was not impressed. Sounded like I was calling into the DMV in Da Hood or something. Yappy and rude, and email inquiries take forever or are just ignored. I wouldn't take any answer I get from the front lines at face value.

But anyway, I assume she meant to say you had to form the trust before claiming or signing the ticket. That doesn't make any sense that you have to form the trust before you even buying the ticket which you have no idea will win, spending hundreds/thousands of dollars on a trust for a $1 ticket with no value.

The IL Lotto article stated that 20% of large wins $1M or more are claimed by trust/partnership. So if all of those were formed before they even purchased the ticket, statistically you would expect there to be millions of losers creating trusts for no reason. Now, maybe that's a thing in Illinois, millions of people wasting money on creating trusts for no reason, but I doubt it.

I posted some other links for Trust claims in Texas and Louisiana, in the other news thread that is more appropriate for this off-topic discussion, perhaps you can check out those too:

https://www.lotterypost.com/news/269462/3381562

And even here on LP, someone else had done some investigative digging for CA anonymous claims rules:

https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/222068/1818123

Basically, the summary of her investigation to me is:
Win a Jackpot first, then have your lawyer call our lawyer, THEN we'll talk.

These lottery people are very sneaky. They'll do anything they can to avoid and obfuscate the whole claiming anonymously by Trust issue. They won't give you a straight answer.

Artist77's avatarArtist77

1)it depends on the state law and whether a person vs. an entity can collect a JP. 

In VA, only a person/individual can collect so no trusts, etc. are permitted  Washington, DC allows trusts.

2.) The next question is if they release names of winners for trusts. For a few states, you have to file a copy of the trust at a local courthouse. Most states require paperwork to be filed for a LLC and some business records can be publicly available. 

So for your state, you really need an expert in trusts to know the law on multiple levels of analysis.

 

PS: There are different types of trusts. I think BLIND trusts have to be formed before the money is won.

Jon D's avatarJon D

Quote: Originally posted by Artist77 on Dec 13, 2013

1)it depends on the state law and whether a person vs. an entity can collect a JP. 

In VA, only a person/individual can collect so no trusts, etc. are permitted  Washington, DC allows trusts.

2.) The next question is if they release names of winners for trusts. For a few states, you have to file a copy of the trust at a local courthouse. Most states require paperwork to be filed for a LLC and some business records can be publicly available. 

So for your state, you really need an expert in trusts to know the law on multiple levels of analysis.

 

PS: There are different types of trusts. I think BLIND trusts have to be formed before the money is won.

So far I've only seen states VA and OR as not allowing a lottery win to be claimed by trust/LLC.

But the issue of winner identification is not so much in the Trust, but the lottery rules. You match the numbers that's just the first part. Then they have to valudate that the ticket was legally obtained and not by an employee, etc. Then they can demand to know who the winner is, like the case with the Hot Lotto lawyer who claimed at the last minute but refused to divulge the original buyer of the ticket. Only after all that, then you are the winner according to their game/rules.

Someone at the lottery will probably always know who the *real* winner is, but as for the payee of record and what gets published and what gets released on a public records request, that's not so clear.

Artist77's avatarArtist77

Quote: Originally posted by sully16 on Dec 13, 2013

I'd back you on that bet, thought the same thing myself, just not enough evidence yet.

I agree also.

KY Floyd's avatarKY Floyd

Quote: Originally posted by Artist77 on Dec 13, 2013

1)it depends on the state law and whether a person vs. an entity can collect a JP. 

In VA, only a person/individual can collect so no trusts, etc. are permitted  Washington, DC allows trusts.

2.) The next question is if they release names of winners for trusts. For a few states, you have to file a copy of the trust at a local courthouse. Most states require paperwork to be filed for a LLC and some business records can be publicly available. 

So for your state, you really need an expert in trusts to know the law on multiple levels of analysis.

 

PS: There are different types of trusts. I think BLIND trusts have to be formed before the money is won.

"In VA, only a person/individual can collect"

Does this ring a bell? "Corporations are people my friends." I don't see a valid way for  a state lottery to prohibit any legal entity from claiming a prize, as long as that entity is the legal owner of a winning ticket, particularly if the ticket is bought by that legal entity. It is possible that lottery rules limit the purchase of tickets to actual people, but I think there are real problems with that, too.

Announcing the name of a particular person may be a separate matter, as I noted in my post above.

Nikkicute's avatarNikkicute

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Dec 13, 2013

I bet the wife's back in court within a year facing murder charges.

Someones got to face it, there is no way someone just got away with it like that,

that easy? No way!

mediabrat's avatarmediabrat

Quote: Originally posted by dr65 on Dec 13, 2013

Well, I guess it doesn't matter who killed him...just so they get the money and property straightened out.

That's priority alright.

One of them must have done it, why are they getting ANYTHING at all?

Because they can't prove that either one of them did anything.  At best, there's circumstantial evidence pointing to the wife, but nothing you could hang charges or a court case on.

I suppose you'd rather the state gobbles up the estate?

mediabrat's avatarmediabrat

Quote: Originally posted by Jon D on Dec 13, 2013

People have killed for less. Murderers are dumb.

Actually, I was wondering why 5 condos only totalled $250,000 together. Real estate in Chicago must really be in the crapper, or those places must be real slummy.

I was thinking the same thing.  There's no way five condos are collectively worth $250K unless Mr. Khan was a slumlord.  $250,000 each sounds more like it, and even that might be on the low side for Chicago.

Artist77's avatarArtist77

Well court cases with circumstantial evidence are brought all the time.  If one can show motive, opportunity, and in this case, I assume only one person controlled the food, it could end up in court.

JackpotWanna's avatarJackpotWanna

RIP Khan.

dallascowboyfan's avatardallascowboyfan

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Dec 13, 2013

I bet the wife's back in court within a year facing murder charges.

I Agree! Something about her story didn't add up.

Subscribe to this news story