NASHUA, N.H. — The New Hampshire lottery commission is asking a judge to dismiss a recent lawsuit brought forward by a local woman claiming to own the winning $560 million Powerball ticket and fighting to remain anonymous.
"Petitioner's desire for normalcy and anonymity is substantially outweighed by the public's right to transparency in the operation of lottery games," wrote Assistant Attorney General John Conforti.
According to the state's motion to dismiss the lawsuit, the lottery commission believes it is legally obligated to release the lottery ticket with the name and hometown of the winner under the state's Right-to-Know Law.
The woman said she has already signed the ticket with her name. Had the ticket been signed by the trustee of a designated trust, the winner could have maintained her privacy.
Lottery rules require a winner to complete and sign the back of a winning Powerball ticket before being able to claim the prize.
Attorneys for the woman recently filed a lawsuit in Hillsborough County Superior Court asking for her identity to remain a secret.
"Petitioner's understandable yearning for normalcy after entering a lottery to win hundreds of millions of dollars is not a sufficient basis to shut the public out of the business of government," wrote Conforti.
In addition, he maintains that lottery participants voluntarily accept that some degree of information is being submitted to a government entity and may be available to the public under the Right-to-Know Law.
A hearing has been scheduled for 10:30 a.m. today to discuss the merits of the case.
The woman, identified in court documents only as Jane Doe, has hired the law firm Shaheen and Gordon to represent her.
Attorney Steven Gordon states in court documents that his client is losing about $14,000 in interest every day that she is unable to claim her prize.
He said the disclosure of her identity would constitute an invasion of privacy because the limited public interest is outweighed by Doe's interest in remaining anonymous and that her half-billion dollars in winnings are certain to attract unwanted and malicious attention.
"While petitioner argues that she did not expect to lose her privacy by purchasing the ticket, all lottery participants play the game subject to the New Hampshire Lottery administrative rules and other applicable lottery rules," argued Conforti. The rules require a winner of more than $599 to "produce a valid identification, sign the ticket with their name and address and submit a claim form with personal information."
Doe submitted a motion for approval of a payment of the lottery winnings to a designated trust on Monday, according to court documents. But the state contends that even if the winner now elects to assign the ticket to a trust, the ticket itself will need to be submitted in its original form — with her signature and hometown.
Conforti said the commission is willing to work with the winner to assist her in any manner allowed under the law, but that the commission must act in accordance with the law.
The commission argues that disclosing the woman's name and address does not represent "substantial privacy interests" and is consistent with what other lottery winners or anyone "who voluntarily engage a government agency" must do.
It says fears over the woman's safety are unfounded and that concerns about the jackpot disrupting her life is "the essence of a large jackpot such as Powerball."
"Petitioners life will be altered whether her name is released or not," the commission wrote. "Petitioner's understandable yearning for normalcy after entering a lottery to win hundreds of millions of dollars is not a sufficient basis to shut the public out of the business of government."
Good for them.
Has anyone entertained the thought that this may hurt sales in the Granite State? IDK, most people could give a rat's behind to issues like hers!
From the OP;
"It says fears over the woman's safety are unfounded and that concerns about the jackpot disrupting her life is "the essence of a large jackpot such as Powerball.""
Somebody tell these clods about Abraham Shakespeare and others.
Watched an old Aussie movie with the Mrs over the weekend called "Strictly Ballroom." In one scene this guy is dancing spectacularly & the audience is going crazy, they start chanting " New steps, new steps"..and the Chairman of the Ballroom committee says with a booming voice " There are no new steps! " Hilarious movie, enjoyable as heck. Kinda reminded me of this woman, she wants " new rules" for her, now that she has won. Btw- Once you see the hairpiece on this chairman's head, it's etched in your memory for all time..l swear.
moise-gate,
Odd that you mentioned the Aussies (sounds like an interesting movie) because their lottery play slips have a NP box to check- No Publicity.
Six states allow you the choice to claim the jackpot anonymously ( Delaware, Kansas, North Dakota, Ohio, and South Carolina)... so it's not like something that can't be done. This is essentially a government operation...benefiting gov't agencies and ultimately the "people"...and those of us who play are paying. Why can't we all have the simple choice whether to be public or not if we win? While they are at it...since the government directly benefits why should they tax our winnings? Canada has tax free jackpots.At the very minimum the jackpots should be taxed at a one time low flat rate of say 10%. Most people who win are nowhere near the tax rate they are thrown into by winning.... even a million dollar jackpot is reduced by 1/3 or more...and the winner may never ever see that kind of money again.... and yet 1/3 is taken, as if that was their regular income... it is not fair at all. Where are the advocates that can represent the common citizen when the gov't sets up situations like the lottery. Who decided the rules? Probably self-interest groups like the ones who decide that only 5 companies could grow legal pot in the whole state of Florida!!??! If this is a gov't of the people then why do a select few decide what is best for the majority like with the lottery system?Why can't we vote on it? We need changes.... and this simple right to be free to win... without harassment is a great place to start...
Very succinct first Post Sam77... Welcome to LP.
l like the Aussie idea very much CT. However Americans as a whole love news. Who's having an affair with whom, who's getting divorce, how much money does so & so have? Must have journalists embedded with the troops, we have an insatiable need to know everything.l think we need to draw the line somewhere, l propose- here!
She should have consulted an attorney before doing anything..
This person is the most ungrateful winner I've ever heard of. This news is a trending story now on Facebook. She obviously has no bills to pay.
At the time of her winnings she was to be in accordance to the rules. Her being a "special" snowflake doesn't automatically grant her exception.
Maybe she can eventually serve to change the rules, but until then the state is well within its logic and actions to ask her to abide.
She will receive the money, regardless of whether or not she can remain anonymous.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/powerball-winner-who-demands-anonymity-to-get-money/ar-BBJ3Cx8?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=UE01DHP
noise-gate,
Oh how true!
I have an acquaintance who was involved in a land deal that had went to court. An auto dealer wanted the property and the land owner complained every day about friends of his calling him and asking how much he was going to get.
I told him since it was in court it was best he cdidn't say anything. His reply was, "That would be rude".
I'm in a rural area.
PS,
I do wonder how many of the 'right to know' set would act very differently if they won a jackpot.
Thanks rundown99 for that link. It was an interesting read from Nashua, NH.
So if her name were to get released, this story is everywhere. Do you ever hear from the largest MM winner from FL? The largest PB winner from MA? How about that 'youngster' that won a huge MM jackpot in FL just last month? They get their money and go on with their lives.
Of course it should be the winner's choice, but honestly believe this won't be the case with this winner. Rules and regulations would have to be changed state by state with the exception of the six that already allow anonymity.
All of this because the winner signed the ticket. Kind of takes the fun out of winning.
Last time the state legislature voted for anonymity the governor vetoed it.
I hope the court rules in her favor.
http://www.wmur.com/article/amendment-would-allow-nh-lottery-winners-to-remain-anonymous/17046032
She should just go ahead and claim the prize, then she can buy anonintity
Me too!
There are 6 states that let you remain anonymous as do other country's. Why is it that people don't have a "right to know" there? I don't feel like I have a "right to know" who she is. It doesn't matter to me, but obviously it matters to some people, and those are the ones I'd be wary of. I hope she wins her case.
The officials in NH say that people want transparency in the lotteries. We do. They can start by helping get ALL the state lotteries to be ball drawings only like NH's is.
This is what happens when you try to get permission to claim the jackpot anonymously. It's so much better and easier to break the very spirit of the "Right-to-Know" Law and let the public forgive you later!
Not many people understand you can get a SEALED name change via your state supreme court. Of course, the public will never think of these insane loopholes let alone most lawyers for that matter, who else but experts in the case laws around name changes would know this trick. The one I talked to said this would be easy as hell to pull off.
A lawyer doing his job could pull it with a winning lottery ticket.
Judge: Here a copy of the unclaimed winning lottery ticket. My client in danger If X knows I won a large amount they come looking for me. Sealed name change granted.
If not you say your brother/whatever were in a gang and they know your whole family by name. Etc. Point is a winning lottery ticket in hand any fairy tale really would do really to get a judge to grant it. judges know that kind of money would attract the wrong kind of attention. They just need a reason from you that attention would be very bad.
Then walk into a lottery office and claim the jackpot under your new name. Reporters/whoever can search thru your name/past history all they want. Nothing will come up. All your old friends will surely know you by your old name. No one the wiser. Don't tell anyone you know your new lottery winner's legal name. You are a legal ghost.
Only people who will know are your bank/IRS/govt. Etc. Change your name back later on if you wish or whatever.
You just obeyed the Right-to-Know Law and at the same time, 100% broke the spirit of it.
She must have a good reason to want to remain anonymous .Maybe a ex that drives her crazy or maybe her kids lives would be in danger or maybe she just loves her home and doesnt want robbers coming around. I hope she gets to live in peace and enjoy her money. And I hope she helps others that really need help. I think if she really wants and needs to be an anonymous winner there should be a way for her to do so. If she doesn't get her wish and ends up in a tragic outcome those that pushed her will regret it ,that is if they have any kind of conscience.
Many years ago, a domestic abuse survivor from Idaho won the jackpot, she had her face plastered all over the news. What she did was, she took her money and headed for California, to a new life and away from the mess. This winner can do the same, pick up her check and head out. It all boils down to the same thing. Moving if you want peace of mind!
Attorney Steven Gordon states in court documents that his client is losing about $14,000 in interest every day that she is unable to claim her prize.
She already signed the back of the ticket so it's her own fault she is losing interest.
"Petitioner's understandable yearning for normalcy after entering a lottery to win hundreds of millions of dollars is not a sufficient basis to shut the public out of the business of government," wrote Conforti.
"This person is the most ungrateful winner I've ever heard of."
Because she'd rather not have her name publicized? Don't be stupid. Nobody sensible would want their name to be publicized, but we've all got to play by the rules. While she wants the lottery to allow her to do something that's prohibited by the rules, she's still working within the rules by asking the court to allow it. I don't think she'll succeed, but the only thing wrong with trying is that she'll have wasted a few grand in legal fees. Anonymous or not, I'm sure that will be a real hardship when she's only going to net about $222 million.
"SEALED name change ... The one I talked to said this would be easy as hell to pull off."
If you ever actually need a lawyer maybe you should hire somebody other than the one you talked to. If you've got an argument that's good enough for a sealed name change there's a decent chance you could just get a court order to have your name withheld instead. Simply wishing to be anonymous despite a law that says you can't be anonymous is unlikely to do the trick. As a matter of practicality a law saying that the winner's name has to be released implies that avoiding the publicity of a lottery win would be one of the reasons that prohibit a name change.
OTOH, for a lot of people there's a quick and easy way to change your name. Just get married and take your spouse's last name. You'll need a pre-nup and a non-disclosure agreement, and you should probably volunteer to make monthly payments as long as your identity as the winner remains unknown. Of course even that won't work if you've already signed the name everyone knows you by on the back of the ticket.
She knows the rules when she buys the ticket though. Don't like the rules? Don't play. It's that simple.
She obviously made a mistake when she signed the back of the ticket ...She should have checked out some things before doing that.She is no exception to the rule and she can always forfeit her winnings if revealing her identity is causing her distress..She is not being forced to claim the winnings...
I think the lottery commissions, and correspondingly the media, should change the way they publicize what winners should do when playing a large jackpot (it applies in all cases but invariably the press is magnified a thousand fold with large jackpots). I have heard innumerable times that players, "should immediately sign the back of their tickets". That is the nucleus of her claim- that she was instructed to sign her ticket and did so. (I believe the article states that she went to the NH Lottery website and read, "sign the ticket"). Upon consulting an attorney and investigating how to limit the resulting publicity she was told to claim it through a trust. Lottery commission disallowed because the ticket was already signed. The mantra/ instructions should be changed from "sign your ticket" to "consult an attorney" before doing anything else.
Glad you agree!