Eight female employees of the Monongalia County sheriff's tax office in West Virginia won Saturday night's $276.3 million Powerball jackpot, officials said today.
Reportedly, the women will take a lump sum payment amounting to about $17 million each.
All of them showed up for work today at the courthouse in Morgantown, according to MetroNews.
Chief Tax Deputy Linda Famico was bombarded with phone calls from media outlets from the time the office opened at 9 a.m.
Famico told a reporter from MetroNews that she plans to stay on the job.
"You know it, but you can't really comprehend it quite yet," she said. "It's kind of early. Everyone is talking. They all have plans, but it's hard to have that sink in."
Famico said employees of the office had a regular Powerball pool, but only eight of the 11 women were in it last week.
She said the winners would give some money to the three who didn't play.
"We're all actually very upset about that," Famico told radio station WAJR.
Famico said her first priority would be to take care of her family.
Nancy Bulla, a spokeswoman for the West Virginia Lottery, said the winning ticket was sold last Thursday at 5:14 p.m. at Paula's, a limited video lottery parlor in Westover.
Eight female employees of the Monongalia County sheriff's tax office won Saturday night's $276.3 million Powerball jackpot, officials said today.
Reportedly, the women will take a lump sum payment amounting to about $17 million each.
All of them showed up for work today at the courthouse in Morgantown, according to MetroNews.
Chief Tax Deputy Linda Famico was bombarded with phone calls from media outlets from the time the office opened at 9 a.m.
Famico told a reporter from MetroNews that she plans to stay on the job.
"You know it, but you can't really comprehend it quite yet," she said. "It's kind of early. Everyone is talking. They all have plans, but it's hard to have that sink in."
Famico said employees of the office had a regular Powerball pool, but only eight of the 11 women were in it last week.
She said the winners would give some money to the three who didn't play.
"We're all actually very upset about that," Famico told radio station WAJR.
Famico said her first priority would be to take care of her family.
Nancy Bulla, a spokeswoman for the West Virginia Lottery, said the winning ticket was sold last Thursday at 5:14 p.m. at Paula's, a limited video lottery parlor in Westover.
Bulla said lottery officials spent Sunday verifying where the ticket was sold.
She said officials performed security checks, including analyzing the original paper stock in the lottery machine, to make sure the ticket came from Paula's.
Maria Skidmore, regional manager for the company that owns Paula's, said she planned to place a sign in a window at the parlor today announcing the big win.
"We thought it was great," Skidmore said. "We were glad it was in West Virginia."
For selling the winning ticket, Paula's can win up to $100,000, according to the lottery's Web site.
This jackpot marks the seventh time a ticket sold in West Virginia has won Powerball. It is the largest win since December 2002, when Jack Whittaker won the $314.9 million jackpot.
More than 1.5 million tickets were sold in West Virginia for Saturday's drawing.
Nearly 2 million other players won prizes totaling more than $12 million.
The winning numbers were six, 22, 42, 43 and 47. The Powerball was 16 and the Power Play was two.
The estimated jackpot for Wednesday is $15 million dollars.
I smell a lawsuit coming, hopefully there were rules in that weekly Pool, that was played,,,cause I don't think they are going to settle for the old "we will give them some money" Line.
I smell a lawsuit coming, hopefully there were rules in that weekly Pool, that was played,,,cause I don't think they are going to settle for the old "we will give them some money" Line.
I'm surprised that was even mentioned to the press. Just by implying the 3 other women deserve a portion of the winnings is tantamount to admitting they should share in the pool. I think it would be very nice if each of the winners gave them a large gift, but that's totally separate.
I smell a lawsuit coming, hopefully there were rules in that weekly Pool, that was played,,,cause I don't think they are going to settle for the old "we will give them some money" Line.
"Famico said employees of the office had a regular Powerball pool, but only eight of the 11 women were in it last week."
I'm assuming this means there were drawings when all 11 were in the pool and when the spokesman said "we will give them some of the money", a lawsuit is very likely. They have an office with 11 women, 8 of the women get $17 million and the 3 women are dependant on the generosity of the other 8.
Do the women in the Sheriff's tax office carry guns?
Although the odds of winning are very slim, this is a good example to show that every agreement should be in writing with the rules clearly stated.
If the 3 women played regularly but decided they were wasting their money on a dream, then they really are not entitled to any of the jackpot. We just don't know the circumstances here.
I smell a lawsuit coming, hopefully there were rules in that weekly Pool, that was played,,,cause I don't think they are going to settle for the old "we will give them some money" Line.
This is why I just say NO to office lottery pools...first of all, there goes your wish for anonymity as someone is going to go blab, blab, blah to the entire world. Second, if everyone with whom you work do not participate all the time, you have a situation like the present one crop up. Third, I like the notion of it just being me winning all that cash (cash value BTW). Fourth, emphasis on my first point as many people I associate with do not believe in playing the lottery...so I will want to keep my source under wraps. Fifth, I want to become a very, very wealthy black guy...not just a well off black guy. Well, last year was the year of convicts winning and everyone but me winning...I declare this to be my year to step into the jackpot circle...albeit anonymously!
I smell a lawsuit coming, hopefully there were rules in that weekly Pool, that was played,,,cause I don't think they are going to settle for the old "we will give them some money" Line.
It's probably not too wise to ever promised co-workers or friends part of your lottery winnings because what ever amount you're willing to share it will never be enough.
When Jack Whitaker won his millions, it was reported that he bought a waitress a home for $80K and she was disappointed because she was expecting something nicer and enough extra cash to maintain it. Others were mad because he set up a foundation with local churches to help the needy and people not from the area felt they weren't getting a fair chance at his winnings.
Quote: Originally posted by justxploring on Mar 17, 2008
Although the odds of winning are very slim, this is a good example to show that every agreement should be in writing with the rules clearly stated.
If the 3 women played regularly but decided they were wasting their money on a dream, then they really are not entitled to any of the jackpot. We just don't know the circumstances here.
I was in a pool where we used the lotto numbers to play a made up game and a small percentage was used to buy QPs. Everybody would pick 6 lotto numbers and the first player to have his six numbers drawn won the pool. The pool was limited to 30 players at $5 a drawing. When the lotto was up to a fixed amount, half of that drawing's prize fund would be used to buy QPs.
We all had to pick 6 numbers and pay $10 to be in the next game, everybody got copy of all the players, their numbers, and the QPs. Any money won in the lotto would be split between those players. Had we won the jackpot, I suppose we could have been sued by somebody that had been in other games, but I don't know how they could prove they should have been included in that game.
When I read about pools where some people are always in and out a red flag goes up. Hopefully this pool won't be sued, but when the spokesman acknowledged the other 3 women were entitled to some of the winnings, she certainly opened the door.
any good lawyer would simply take the case on the foundation, ya snooze ya lose! Sorry but if ya didnt pay, ya dont get to decide how the winners money is divided up. A contract has three parts, consent, parameter (guidelines) and signatures..it doesnt have to be written.
My lottery pool is three people, me,myself and I. *grin*
Not a fan of large groups winning but hey, so be it. Just sorry that it had to be a group of women who cant learn to be quiet til AFTER they collect the money. The only gain of this is, the lady who plans to stay at her job a little while. She at least doesnt count her chickens before they are hatched.
I agree with you, GameGrl, but the problem is that frivolous lawsuits aren't that uncommon these days. Remember the man who found a scratch-off in the trash and had to fight in court to collect the money? That was in MA and, even after the Lottery ruled in his favor, he still had legal battles to fight.
As a Non-Resident Living in Canada, I was in Vermont for spring Break and bought a few tickets when I stopped Off for Gas. As a Non Resident I would have to leave the Fed's Tax withholdings of approximately 30.0 % of a Lump Sum Cash all in advance, meaning (rules state that Non-Residents must settle for Lump-sum Payments ) My Question is , how would the General Public feel about a situation where a Tourist won? Even Though I love the U.S.A. and would definitely buy myself a house in the State, and even open a Business (yes A DREAM ! ) Would that offend The People Living in the State ?
Maybe you should start a thread on this subject, KamehamehaIII. Living in FL, I know it's happened a few times. I remember when a couple visiting from Germany won. Also, many people travel from border states like Alabama and Georgia when the jackpot is large. I wouldn't be too surprised to learn that Canadian has also won a lottery game in FL.
The bottom line is if you buy a ticket and you are visiting our country legally, you have the same right to win as anyone else. I certainly would feel that way if I visited Canada and bought a ticket.
Thanks to You i Sunny Florida , I live in Canada and we Just Keep Getting Alot of Snow, But Trajedy has struck , last week in Ski Country St-Sauveur Quebec , a roof collapsed killing three woman at a Specialty Foof Manufacturer. Sad , My Prayers go Out To Their Families.
Getting Back to the Topic of the Lucky Winners, they should seek a Tax Lawyers guidance on the best way to set up Trust funds for the Children, I have already a plan with a state Tax Lawyer, Just In Case ! , Well , I'm Feeling Very Lucky, on Christmas Eve I was at the Royal Hawain, The Most Beautiful Hotel in Waikiki . I had Deja Vu of The King of Rock'n Roll. Well it Being Renovated and will close from april 2008 to Early 2009 , and re-open onthe same date it opened some 90 + years Ago.
I smell a lawsuit coming, hopefully there were rules in that weekly Pool, that was played,,,cause I don't think they are going to settle for the old "we will give them some money" Line.
there is no chance of WINNING a lawsuit...the others didnt put up their money to play and they get nothing...if someone said we will give you something and after they change mind and say we'll give you nothing they can do so...didnt play your not entitled to share...no winning argument in any court...whatever they decide to share is a big gift to the recipient no matter the amount...they could have chiped in a buck in the pool but didn't...if you cannot give me one buck then why should i give you millions?..NO play, NO winnings...they may decide to sue but they are not entitled so the lawsuit will fail
Quote: Originally posted by benmas on Mar 17, 2008
there is no chance of WINNING a lawsuit...the others didnt put up their money to play and they get nothing...if someone said we will give you something and after they change mind and say we'll give you nothing they can do so...didnt play your not entitled to share...no winning argument in any court...whatever they decide to share is a big gift to the recipient no matter the amount...they could have chiped in a buck in the pool but didn't...if you cannot give me one buck then why should i give you millions?..NO play, NO winnings...they may decide to sue but they are not entitled so the lawsuit will fail
Law & logic seldom go hand in hand.What appears to the layman as a cut & dried case seldom is.A good shyster,er, I mean attorney could get the others ladies an equal share just because one of the ladies remarked that they would give them something.Once the door has been opened it will be difficult to close it.This is assuming that someone sues the group,which is a big assumption to make.
Quote: Originally posted by MaddMike51 on Mar 17, 2008
Law & logic seldom go hand in hand.What appears to the layman as a cut & dried case seldom is.A good shyster,er, I mean attorney could get the others ladies an equal share just because one of the ladies remarked that they would give them something.Once the door has been opened it will be difficult to close it.This is assuming that someone sues the group,which is a big assumption to make.
I agree. One must never say never when it comes to lawsuits about "missing players". There are a few lawsuits going on right now, where people have claimed that they were regular paying, lottery pool members, but happened to miss out of the winning drawing and are suing to get their share. Happens all the time. Just read the articles here. There is actually a pretty big story about one going on in Canada right now.
Quote: Originally posted by MaddMike51 on Mar 17, 2008
Law & logic seldom go hand in hand.What appears to the layman as a cut & dried case seldom is.A good shyster,er, I mean attorney could get the others ladies an equal share just because one of the ladies remarked that they would give them something.Once the door has been opened it will be difficult to close it.This is assuming that someone sues the group,which is a big assumption to make.
I agree. It can happen, and possibly win. Admitting the other three always play could be the straw that breaks the camel's back. Less said at this point wouldn't be a bad idea, if it isn't too late. Joe
I smell a lawsuit coming, hopefully there were rules in that weekly Pool, that was played,,,cause I don't think they are going to settle for the old "we will give them some money" Line.
You are probably right.. I am in a office lottery pool and we all had to sign a contract, one of the rules were if you did not play that week, if we hit you did not get a share of anything. The only exception that was made was that if there were a medical emergency or death in the family --(we would put your share in)........ Other than that zero input meant zero dollars!! We all agreed and we signed it.
Quote: Originally posted by Kidzmom on Mar 18, 2008
You are probably right.. I am in a office lottery pool and we all had to sign a contract, one of the rules were if you did not play that week, if we hit you did not get a share of anything. The only exception that was made was that if there were a medical emergency or death in the family --(we would put your share in)........ Other than that zero input meant zero dollars!! We all agreed and we signed it.
i agree with above....pool rules should be simple to follow and also common sense...in my office we have a sign up sheet that includes the people who contributed and amount...everyone contributes same amount in to buying tickets, winnings for that draw get divided equally among participating members for that draw and if winnings are below $150 they go into next pot for buying tickets...we give everyone a photo copy of all tickets for them to check before draw.....in this case the 8 winning memebrs have said that they will share part of their winnings but i seriously doubt they will split equally..they will most likely give em something ($100,000 or so)..which the others will not accept and take it to court...but i'll still say that if they did not contribute money to buy tickets for that draw they should not be entitled to any winning from that draw...whatever anyone said they will share part of can be any amount...the judge will most likely say..you didnt participate you get no equal share (the millions), take whatever 100,000 they will give you and have a nice day...friendships ruined forever after that
Quote: Originally posted by KamehamehaIII on Mar 17, 2008
Thanks to You i Sunny Florida , I live in Canada and we Just Keep Getting Alot of Snow, But Trajedy has struck , last week in Ski Country St-Sauveur Quebec , a roof collapsed killing three woman at a Specialty Foof Manufacturer. Sad , My Prayers go Out To Their Families.
Yes, that's very sad. Are you near Mont Tremblant? It's been 20 years, but I used to ski a lot and I drove to Quebec. Very pretty area.
Quote: Originally posted by benmas on Mar 17, 2008
there is no chance of WINNING a lawsuit...the others didnt put up their money to play and they get nothing...if someone said we will give you something and after they change mind and say we'll give you nothing they can do so...didnt play your not entitled to share...no winning argument in any court...whatever they decide to share is a big gift to the recipient no matter the amount...they could have chiped in a buck in the pool but didn't...if you cannot give me one buck then why should i give you millions?..NO play, NO winnings...they may decide to sue but they are not entitled so the lawsuit will fail
There's always a chance of winning a lawsuit, no matter how frivolous it might seem, especially to those who get their information from a brief news report. Some of the people speculating about the possibility of lawsuit in this case must have read a different article than the one I read, because the one I read doesn't offer any useful information on whether such a case would be frivolous or not. Based on this article, there was no statement by anyone suggesting (much less a "spokeperson acknowledging") that the others are entitled to anything. Any offer to give some money to the non-participants is exactly that: an offer, not a promise or admission that the group is obligated (legally or morally) to share with the others.
If the office had a regular pool in which all 11 sometimes participated and there is lawsuit it should be decided based on the agreement, and why some people alledgedly weren't in it for this drawing. Unless there is a well-written agreement that clearly indicates otherwise, you can be sure the plaintiff's lawyer will use the alledged statement that the winners are upset that the others did not participate, and intend to give them a share, to suggest that the winners know that the non-winners were unfairly shut out of the pool.
Quote: Originally posted by KY Floyd on Mar 18, 2008
There's always a chance of winning a lawsuit, no matter how frivolous it might seem, especially to those who get their information from a brief news report. Some of the people speculating about the possibility of lawsuit in this case must have read a different article than the one I read, because the one I read doesn't offer any useful information on whether such a case would be frivolous or not. Based on this article, there was no statement by anyone suggesting (much less a "spokeperson acknowledging") that the others are entitled to anything. Any offer to give some money to the non-participants is exactly that: an offer, not a promise or admission that the group is obligated (legally or morally) to share with the others.
If the office had a regular pool in which all 11 sometimes participated and there is lawsuit it should be decided based on the agreement, and why some people alledgedly weren't in it for this drawing. Unless there is a well-written agreement that clearly indicates otherwise, you can be sure the plaintiff's lawyer will use the alledged statement that the winners are upset that the others did not participate, and intend to give them a share, to suggest that the winners know that the non-winners were unfairly shut out of the pool.
if the 3 that didnt play act really bitchy then the 8 who won should put down $1 million each and buy the best lawyer there is (for $8 million) or bribe the judge or jury to prevent the other 3 from winning the lawsuit assuming they file one...you want to play nasty..the money talks here the bulls**t will walk..no play no sharing
Quote: Originally posted by justxploring on Mar 17, 2008
I'm surprised that was even mentioned to the press. Just by implying the 3 other women deserve a portion of the winnings is tantamount to admitting they should share in the pool. I think it would be very nice if each of the winners gave them a large gift, but that's totally separate.
Ooooohhh, Ooooh, OoooH! I totally agree, Justexploring. I was SUR PRIZ eD!!!! with that statement. Then I thought, I hope that they pool had a contract in writing in those situations. I hope they know better than to not have a thorough contract! But then again, they might not be Lottery Post Members! Oh well, let's see how this one turns out. THE MOOLA can mean MADNESS!
Quote: Originally posted by Kidzmom on Mar 18, 2008
You are probably right.. I am in a office lottery pool and we all had to sign a contract, one of the rules were if you did not play that week, if we hit you did not get a share of anything. The only exception that was made was that if there were a medical emergency or death in the family --(we would put your share in)........ Other than that zero input meant zero dollars!! We all agreed and we signed it.
My daughter in Louisiana is in a pool and they included the information you mentioned in their contract. They went as far as to define Medical emergency.
Quote: Originally posted by mylollipop on Mar 18, 2008
My daughter in Louisiana is in a pool and they included the information you mentioned in their contract. They went as far as to define Medical emergency.
I smell trouble brewing. Greed has no bounds. Even the winners admitted the co-workers who didn't play that day deserve something. The question is how much? $100,000 - $1 million or more? If I were the winners here, I would have just included them into winners list and save on court cost. 11/276 million = $25 million each, 8/276 million = $34.5 million. I guess there is a difference.
I am gong to redraft our pool agreement. Medical leave is one I did not think of adding. One time a player was out for medical reasons but one other player stated she will cover her portion. I am in charge of our pool and we play montly not every drawing. It states if you dont pay you dont play, they each get a copy of the ticket and who paid for the month. We are state employees and get paid on the first Our pool is now 4 people, our building has about 100 employee though there may be other pools too. The most our pool has one is 8 dollars more than once. We are Dollaraires!!! maybe next we will be Thousandnaires.
re-draft all ya want. The facts are no contract is air tight based clearly on most folks who say that a lawsuit can be brought about by the most ludicrious of allegations. Sorry but I stand by the courts and the legal system, that no pay no win still holds true. And to those that make claims that such suits exist, please be exact and name the docket # and dates. Chances are the over generalization that such is going on isnt near the truth of facts. My in law is a lawyer and he has access to case laws/suits. Contracts can be modified but if the courts find them bias, the whole contract is null....
Finding a ticket and making claims is NOT the same arguement as a person who insist that even though they didnt play that week in the pool they are entitled to all the rewards.
Quote: Originally posted by TheGameGrl on Mar 18, 2008
re-draft all ya want. The facts are no contract is air tight based clearly on most folks who say that a lawsuit can be brought about by the most ludicrious of allegations. Sorry but I stand by the courts and the legal system, that no pay no win still holds true. And to those that make claims that such suits exist, please be exact and name the docket # and dates. Chances are the over generalization that such is going on isnt near the truth of facts. My in law is a lawyer and he has access to case laws/suits. Contracts can be modified but if the courts find them bias, the whole contract is null....
Finding a ticket and making claims is NOT the same arguement as a person who insist that even though they didnt play that week in the pool they are entitled to all the rewards.
Ok. Well these are just four accounts of people who are suing over lottery pool wins. There are many more. The first one being one of the most recent.
By the way, I have relatives who are lawyers and a judge in the family! That doesn't mean anything. These claims may be frivolous or ludicrous, but that doesn't mean that someone can't file a lawsuit. It does happen. Too say it doesn't is silly. Just do a search and you can see it happens all the time. I'm not going to go looking for the actual case numbers and dates.
Quote: Originally posted by benmas on Mar 17, 2008
there is no chance of WINNING a lawsuit...the others didnt put up their money to play and they get nothing...if someone said we will give you something and after they change mind and say we'll give you nothing they can do so...didnt play your not entitled to share...no winning argument in any court...whatever they decide to share is a big gift to the recipient no matter the amount...they could have chiped in a buck in the pool but didn't...if you cannot give me one buck then why should i give you millions?..NO play, NO winnings...they may decide to sue but they are not entitled so the lawsuit will fail
Well I hope you are right, but unfortunatly I think this might go to court, and with the right attorney, could get hung up untill they squeeze out a settlement that they might think is fair, or they actually win....a street smart attorney will jump in and play for his share, regardless of who pays him....This won't be about right or wrong, this is a "how long are you willing to play the game of Law and money."
By the way, I have relatives who are lawyers and a judge in the family! That doesn't mean anything. These claims may be frivolous or ludicrous, but that doesn't mean that someone can't file a lawsuit. It does happen. Too say it doesn't is silly. Just do a search and you can see it happens all the time. I'm not going to go looking for the actual case numbers and dates.
Congrats to the eight lucky winners.
Could you float me a loan?
I hope they remember to pay their taxes...
Cool!!!!!
I smell a lawsuit coming, hopefully there were rules in that weekly Pool, that was played,,,cause I don't think they are going to settle for the old "we will give them some money" Line.
I'm surprised that was even mentioned to the press. Just by implying the 3 other women deserve a portion of the winnings is tantamount to admitting they should share in the pool. I think it would be very nice if each of the winners gave them a large gift, but that's totally separate.
I agree. It sounds like there may be a chance of a lawsuit. Hopefully, it doesn't happen, but that is a lot of money and money changes some people.
"Famico said employees of the office had a regular Powerball pool, but only eight of the 11 women were in it last week."
I'm assuming this means there were drawings when all 11 were in the pool and when the spokesman said "we will give them some of the money", a lawsuit is very likely. They have an office with 11 women, 8 of the women get $17 million and the 3 women are dependant on the generosity of the other 8.
Do the women in the Sheriff's tax office carry guns?
Although the odds of winning are very slim, this is a good example to show that every agreement should be in writing with the rules clearly stated.
If the 3 women played regularly but decided they were wasting their money on a dream, then they really are not entitled to any of the jackpot. We just don't know the circumstances here.
This is why I just say NO to office lottery pools...first of all, there goes your wish for anonymity as someone is going to go blab, blab, blah to the entire world. Second, if everyone with whom you work do not participate all the time, you have a situation like the present one crop up. Third, I like the notion of it just being me winning all that cash (cash value BTW). Fourth, emphasis on my first point as many people I associate with do not believe in playing the lottery...so I will want to keep my source under wraps. Fifth, I want to become a very, very wealthy black guy...not just a well off black guy. Well, last year was the year of convicts winning and everyone but me winning...I declare this to be my year to step into the jackpot circle...albeit anonymously!
I like pools. I just can't find one in my area. I know there are several.
When Jack Whitaker won his millions, it was reported that he bought a waitress a home for $80K and she was disappointed because she was expecting something nicer and enough extra cash to maintain it. Others were mad because he set up a foundation with local churches to help the needy and people not from the area felt they weren't getting a fair chance at his winnings.
I was in a pool where we used the lotto numbers to play a made up game and a small percentage was used to buy QPs. Everybody would pick 6 lotto numbers and the first player to have his six numbers drawn won the pool. The pool was limited to 30 players at $5 a drawing. When the lotto was up to a fixed amount, half of that drawing's prize fund would be used to buy QPs.
We all had to pick 6 numbers and pay $10 to be in the next game, everybody got copy of all the players, their numbers, and the QPs. Any money won in the lotto would be split between those players. Had we won the jackpot, I suppose we could have been sued by somebody that had been in other games, but I don't know how they could prove they should have been included in that game.
When I read about pools where some people are always in and out a red flag goes up. Hopefully this pool won't be sued, but when the spokesman acknowledged the other 3 women were entitled to some of the winnings, she certainly opened the door.
any good lawyer would simply take the case on the foundation, ya snooze ya lose! Sorry but if ya didnt pay, ya dont get to decide how the winners money is divided up. A contract has three parts, consent, parameter (guidelines) and signatures..it doesnt have to be written.
My lottery pool is three people, me,myself and I. *grin*
Not a fan of large groups winning but hey, so be it. Just sorry that it had to be a group of women who cant learn to be quiet til AFTER they collect the money. The only gain of this is, the lady who plans to stay at her job a little while. She at least doesnt count her chickens before they are hatched.
I agree with you, GameGrl, but the problem is that frivolous lawsuits aren't that uncommon these days. Remember the man who found a scratch-off in the trash and had to fight in court to collect the money? That was in MA and, even after the Lottery ruled in his favor, he still had legal battles to fight.
Good Evening,
As a Non-Resident Living in Canada, I was in Vermont for spring Break and bought a few tickets when I stopped Off for Gas. As a Non Resident I would have to leave the Fed's Tax withholdings of approximately 30.0 % of a Lump Sum Cash all in advance, meaning (rules state that Non-Residents must settle for Lump-sum Payments ) My Question is , how would the General Public feel about a situation where a Tourist won? Even Though I love the U.S.A. and would definitely buy myself a house in the State, and even open a Business (yes A DREAM ! ) Would that offend The People Living in the State ?
Maybe you should start a thread on this subject, KamehamehaIII. Living in FL, I know it's happened a few times. I remember when a couple visiting from Germany won. Also, many people travel from border states like Alabama and Georgia when the jackpot is large. I wouldn't be too surprised to learn that Canadian has also won a lottery game in FL.
The bottom line is if you buy a ticket and you are visiting our country legally, you have the same right to win as anyone else. I certainly would feel that way if I visited Canada and bought a ticket.
there is no chance of WINNING a lawsuit...the others didnt put up their money to play and they get nothing...if someone said we will give you something and after they change mind and say we'll give you nothing they can do so...didnt play your not entitled to share...no winning argument in any court...whatever they decide to share is a big gift to the recipient no matter the amount...they could have chiped in a buck in the pool but didn't...if you cannot give me one buck then why should i give you millions?..NO play, NO winnings...they may decide to sue but they are not entitled so the lawsuit will fail
Law & logic seldom go hand in hand.What appears to the layman as a cut & dried case seldom is.A good shyster,er, I mean attorney could get the others ladies an equal share just because one of the ladies remarked that they would give them something.Once the door has been opened it will be difficult to close it.This is assuming that someone sues the group,which is a big assumption to make.
This is why I always stay current in my office pools...I'm involved in 3 of them, @ $2 each per week, and I pay mine every Monday without failure.
Another lottery pool, of course. Tax people as well, what irony.
U may have<<<<<<
missed OUT of LIFE if U have not worked for D goverment>>>>>
THEY have a LOTTO p@@l'$$$$$$$$$$$$ and sum are X-CE$$$$
Football>>>>>>>>Baseball>>>>>>>Soccer>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
LOCAL>>>>>>>>>STATE>>>>>>>>NATIONAL team'$$$$$$$$$
IT's...GREAT>>>>>It's what's happen NOW.
Go to work and
"WIN"
I agree. One must never say never when it comes to lawsuits about "missing players". There are a few lawsuits going on right now, where people have claimed that they were regular paying, lottery pool members, but happened to miss out of the winning drawing and are suing to get their share. Happens all the time. Just read the articles here. There is actually a pretty big story about one going on in Canada right now.
I agree. It can happen, and possibly win. Admitting the other three always play could be the straw that breaks the camel's back. Less said at this point wouldn't be a bad idea, if it isn't too late. Joe
You are probably right.. I am in a office lottery pool and we all had to sign a contract, one of the rules were if you did not play that week, if we hit you did not get a share of anything. The only exception that was made was that if there were a medical emergency or death in the family --(we would put your share in)........ Other than that zero input meant zero dollars!! We all agreed and we signed it.
i agree with above....pool rules should be simple to follow and also common sense...in my office we have a sign up sheet that includes the people who contributed and amount...everyone contributes same amount in to buying tickets, winnings for that draw get divided equally among participating members for that draw and if winnings are below $150 they go into next pot for buying tickets...we give everyone a photo copy of all tickets for them to check before draw.....in this case the 8 winning memebrs have said that they will share part of their winnings but i seriously doubt they will split equally..they will most likely give em something ($100,000 or so)..which the others will not accept and take it to court...but i'll still say that if they did not contribute money to buy tickets for that draw they should not be entitled to any winning from that draw...whatever anyone said they will share part of can be any amount...the judge will most likely say..you didnt participate you get no equal share (the millions), take whatever 100,000 they will give you and have a nice day...friendships ruined forever after that
Yes, that's very sad. Are you near Mont Tremblant? It's been 20 years, but I used to ski a lot and I drove to Quebec. Very pretty area.
There's always a chance of winning a lawsuit, no matter how frivolous it might seem, especially to those who get their information from a brief news report. Some of the people speculating about the possibility of lawsuit in this case must have read a different article than the one I read, because the one I read doesn't offer any useful information on whether such a case would be frivolous or not. Based on this article, there was no statement by anyone suggesting (much less a "spokeperson acknowledging") that the others are entitled to anything. Any offer to give some money to the non-participants is exactly that: an offer, not a promise or admission that the group is obligated (legally or morally) to share with the others.
If the office had a regular pool in which all 11 sometimes participated and there is lawsuit it should be decided based on the agreement, and why some people alledgedly weren't in it for this drawing. Unless there is a well-written agreement that clearly indicates otherwise, you can be sure the plaintiff's lawyer will use the alledged statement that the winners are upset that the others did not participate, and intend to give them a share, to suggest that the winners know that the non-winners were unfairly shut out of the pool.
if the 3 that didnt play act really bitchy then the 8 who won should put down $1 million each and buy the best lawyer there is (for $8 million) or bribe the judge or jury to prevent the other 3 from winning the lawsuit assuming they file one...you want to play nasty..the money talks here the bulls**t will walk..no play no sharing
Ooooohhh, Ooooh, OoooH! I totally agree, Justexploring. I was SUR PRIZ eD!!!! with that statement. Then I thought, I hope that they pool had a contract in writing in those situations. I hope they know better than to not have a thorough contract! But then again, they might not be Lottery Post Members! Oh well, let's see how this one turns out. THE MOOLA can mean MADNESS!
My daughter in Louisiana is in a pool and they included the information you mentioned in their contract. They went as far as to define Medical emergency.
smart people.
I smell trouble brewing. Greed has no bounds. Even the winners admitted the co-workers who didn't play that day deserve something. The question is how much? $100,000 - $1 million or more? If I were the winners here, I would have just included them into winners list and save on court cost. 11/276 million = $25 million each, 8/276 million = $34.5 million. I guess there is a difference.
Anyway wtg to the winners.
I am gong to redraft our pool agreement. Medical leave is one I did not think of adding. One time a player was out for medical reasons but one other player stated she will cover her portion. I am in charge of our pool and we play montly not every drawing. It states if you dont pay you dont play, they each get a copy of the ticket and who paid for the month. We are state employees and get paid on the first Our pool is now 4 people, our building has about 100 employee though there may be other pools too. The most our pool has one is 8 dollars more than once. We are Dollaraires!!! maybe next we will be Thousandnaires.
re-draft all ya want. The facts are no contract is air tight based clearly on most folks who say that a lawsuit can be brought about by the most ludicrious of allegations. Sorry but I stand by the courts and the legal system, that no pay no win still holds true. And to those that make claims that such suits exist, please be exact and name the docket # and dates. Chances are the over generalization that such is going on isnt near the truth of facts. My in law is a lawyer and he has access to case laws/suits. Contracts can be modified but if the courts find them bias, the whole contract is null....
Finding a ticket and making claims is NOT the same arguement as a person who insist that even though they didnt play that week in the pool they are entitled to all the rewards.
Ok. Well these are just four accounts of people who are suing over lottery pool wins. There are many more. The first one being one of the most recent.
https://www.lotterypost.com/news/169065
https://www.lotterypost.com/news/135957
https://www.lotterypost.com/news/135160
https://www.lotterypost.com/news/130962
By the way, I have relatives who are lawyers and a judge in the family! That doesn't mean anything. These claims may be frivolous or ludicrous, but that doesn't mean that someone can't file a lawsuit. It does happen. Too say it doesn't is silly. Just do a search and you can see it happens all the time. I'm not going to go looking for the actual case numbers and dates.
Well I hope you are right, but unfortunatly I think this might go to court, and with the right attorney, could get hung up untill they squeeze out a settlement that they might think is fair, or they actually win....a street smart attorney will jump in and play for his share, regardless of who pays him....This won't be about right or wrong, this is a "how long are you willing to play the game of Law and money."
They steal from us and they win the lottery.
They don't steal from us. They just work there.
Just click on your state.
http://www.loonylaws.com/
This site has more of them. Wonder how many are still on the books?
http://www.serenitysangel.net/laws/Silly.html