Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 9, 2016, 8:24 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Lawsuit over $315 million lottery jackpot goes to trial

Topic closed. 37 replies. Last post 10 years ago by dvdiva.

Page 3 of 3
PrintE-mailLink
csfb's avatar - Lottery-001.jpg

United States
Member #15309
May 13, 2005
307 Posts
Offline
Posted: June 8, 2006, 6:07 pm - IP Logged

The lawyers are slugging it out for the money "earned" through their fees, the heck with whether winners get a penny.

Have heard a suggestion that if someone sues someone else and loses,  loser in lawsuits pays all court costs and all attorney fees including those of the defendant .... which would likely eliminate a lot of "let's file and see if they pay us to go away" stuff clogging the court system.

Also my above suggestion that (stated in writing of course) each drawing represents a separate pool which begins and ends with a particular drawing and does not tie into any previous or future one.  Similar principle as having some of today's winning numbers last week's ticket doesn't entitle me to any of todays winnings  AND another argument offered here on LP that simply buying a ticket for a drawing gives ownership to winnings in that drawing.

Parties to some cases actually include in their prayers that all costs and attorney fees be paid for by the losing party.  This detracts people from filing frivolous lawsuits.  In addition the attorney is heftily penalized by the court for filing a patently frivolous case.

Actually, I'm glad the court is hearing this case.  The decision in this case will be pursuasive guide to all other lottery pools similarly situated.  If this case reaches the CA Supreme Court, and decides to hear it, then the decision becomes the law of the state, and pursuasive in other states.  If the case reaches the U.S. Supreme Court, and the highest court hears it, then, the decision becomes the law on lottery pools in every state.

 

If you follow lottery disputes, then you might remember this case from a few years back.
 
http://www.8bm.com/diatribes/volume01/038/770.htm

Supreme Court Says No Verbal Agreements In Million Dollar Lottery Ticket Dispute
 
In Alabama the law prohibits the forming of a gambling contract. So due to this technicality Tonda Dickerson, despite agreeing to share her winnings with four co-workers if her ticket won the state lottery, can keep all of the money to herself. 

In March 1999, a regular at the chain's Grand Bay restaurant, Edward Seward, handed out lottery tickets to all five workers. The ticket held by Dickerson contained the winning combination of numbers 3-4-7-36-39-40. When Dickerson denied there was an agreement to share the proceeds, the foursome filed a lawsuit.

It was later discovered that Dickerson lied about there not being an agreement, and that the group had made a sharing agreement between themselves, however this doesn’t mean sh** since what they did is illegal in the great state of Alabama. 

This cases was covered on CBS 60min news program, even Edward Seward who bought all the tickets and gave them out didn't get a penny. 

No, I'm not familiar with this case at all.  And I would have to read the decision before making a reasonable comment.  Does Alabama have a specific statute on gambling contracts?  Why did this case reach the state supreme court in the first place?  There must be a question of law.

Nonetheless, that Alabama Supreme Court decision is mandatory in Alabama, but merely pursuasive in other states, i.e. in cases similarly situated.

    TheGameGrl's avatar - character catafly.jpg
    A long and winding road
    United States
    Member #17084
    June 10, 2005
    4529 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: June 9, 2006, 11:16 pm - IP Logged

    The problem *IS* the LAWS in California. This case is on a state level and is being heard to gain publicity for the game. Think about it, its california, the land of media where anything goes and often does! I dont agree with the suit nor do I need to hear of the ludicrice(sp?) comments by a slighted and missed opportunist.  He didnt pay to play. its that simple.

    And I did get a chuckle out of the comment that someone wasnt a citizen of the state. I beleive the term is a resident of the state. Most folks are citizens of the country in which they reside. But with the current immigration concern I may need to change 'most' to some.

     

    ~~Is it true, Is it kind,Is it necessary. ~~~

    christmas holly jolly numbers: 255,303,6911, 474,477 silver:47,gold:79.

      RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
      mid-Ohio
      United States
      Member #9
      March 24, 2001
      19830 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: June 10, 2006, 2:04 pm - IP Logged

      I don't get it, The guy wants the money but they already gave the money to the 7 winners.  They said they each got the money before christmas, And the trial date is too far away,  it's a whole year away and by that time people will have forgotten about it.

      You can bet Jonathan De La Cruz won't forget or any of the others who are suing.  Mr. Cruz probably was hoping the seven would settle with him for a few million dollars rather than have a long trial, but with some of his other co-workers trying to run the same scam there's no chance of that happing now.

       * you don't need to buy more tickets, just buy a winning ticket * 
         
                   Evil Looking       

        Avatar
        New Member
        Crisp N.C.
        United States
        Member #41050
        June 10, 2006
        1 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: June 10, 2006, 8:42 pm - IP Logged

        I Think They Should All Take A Lie Detector Test , And The One Or The One's That Are Caught Lieing Should Not Get Anything. And There Photo Should Be Showed On Live T.V. And Stamped As LIAR!!!

          csfb's avatar - Lottery-001.jpg

          United States
          Member #15309
          May 13, 2005
          307 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: June 10, 2006, 9:29 pm - IP Logged

          The problem *IS* the LAWS in California. This case is on a state level and is being heard to gain publicity for the game. Think about it, its california, the land of media where anything goes and often does! I dont agree with the suit nor do I need to hear of the ludicrice(sp?) comments by a slighted and missed opportunist.  He didnt pay to play. its that simple.

          And I did get a chuckle out of the comment that someone wasnt a citizen of the state. I beleive the term is a resident of the state. Most folks are citizens of the country in which they reside. But with the current immigration concern I may need to change 'most' to some.

           

          "And I did get a chuckle out of the comment that someone wasn't a citizen of the state. I beleive the term is a resident of the state..." - what is funny about that, GameGrl??

          The term, "citizen of a state" is an absolutely correct term. Whoever used it, perhaps knows more than you.

          Truth be told, you are so wanting in grammar, spelling, punctuation and reason - not only on this post, but your other posts. So before you start chuckling again, just pause a moment. The last laugh may be on you.

            Avatar
            New Member
            grandbahama
            Bahamas
            Member #41139
            June 11, 2006
            6 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: June 11, 2006, 9:57 pm - IP Logged

            hello everybody

             

              Avatar
              New Member
              grandbahama
              Bahamas
              Member #41139
              June 11, 2006
              6 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: June 11, 2006, 10:05 pm - IP Logged

              I feel the rush of 320, 903, 101, 911, 932, 500,801, 510, 999, 845, 100 for june month   0309, 9111, 9115, 1039,1139,6930,1036, 9300, 5252, 2019, 1085, 0885, 3872, 3890, 1026                                                                                                                                           

                dvdiva's avatar - 8ball

                United States
                Member #2338
                September 17, 2003
                2063 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: June 12, 2006, 6:54 pm - IP Logged

                What on earth does that have to do with this thread?

                To me it just illustrates why the only pool I will play in will be in the large house I get if I win a large PB/MM/Euro pot. Playing with money like this only invites lawsuits and no one gets a dime of the money for years except the lawyers. The winners may get the annuity by default after the lawsuits are settled either way.