Contention over who should be entitled to the jackpot prize
By Kate Northrop
An employee at an Arizona Lottery retailer is being taken to court after purchasing a lottery ticket he already knew won a $12.8 million jackpot in The Pick.
There's a legal battle heating up in Arizona over a $12.8 million The Pick jackpot and about who the winning lottery ticket rightfully belongs to.
A complaint filed by Circle K reveals that on Nov. 24, 2025, a customer visited the location at East Bell Road in Scottsdale and asked the clerk to print off some The Pick tickets with numbers they had previously played before. The employee printed $85 in tickets, but the player paid for $60 worth of tickets from the stack and left, leaving behind a pile of unpurchased tickets.
The Arizona Lottery drew The Pick results later that night: 3, 13, 14, 15, 19, and 26. One of the tickets in that stack of leftover tickets at the store matched all six numbers to win the $12.8 million jackpot.
Circle K store manager Robert Gawlitza started work the following morning and found out that a winning ticket for the previous evening's drawing was sold at the store, court documents say. He sifted through the rejects, and low and behold, there was the jackpot-winning ticket.
Filings say Gawlitza clocked out, removed his company uniform, and bought some of the tickets from another employee for $10, after which he signed the back of the ticket worth $12.8 million.
Before he could cash it in, corporate at Circle K found out what had taken place and stepped in, arranging for the ticket to be taken to Arizona Lottery offices and kept there until true ownership could be determined.
"Circle K is committed to doing the right thing and maintaining a strong, transparent partnership with the Arizona Lottery," a statement from Circle K Director of Communications Rich Elfrus to 12News reads. "That commitment is precisely why we have asked the court how best to proceed under these unique circumstances. It is not accurate to characterize this as a lawsuit against any specific party. It is a declaratory judgment complaint filed to seek clarity from the court to determine rightful ownership of this lottery ticket..."
The store chain filed a lawsuit against Gawlitza on Feb. 17 and named the Arizona Lottery as one of the defendants.
An Arizona Lottery spokesperson told AZFamily that they could not recall a situation that had a retailer and one of its employees at odds with each other over a winning ticket.
"This is a unique situation, and we are not aware of any prior litigation of this sort involving the Arizona Lottery," the spokesperson said in their statement.
According to Arizona Administrative Code describing "Ticket Sales to Players," the ticket would rightfully belong to the retailer who sold the discarded ticket.
"All draw game ticket sales are final," the regulation reads. "If a retailer accepts a returned draw game ticket from a player or generates a draw game ticket refused by the player and the retailer does not resell the ticket, the Lottery shall deem the draw game ticket to be owned by the retailer."
Circle K cited the rule in its filings but is still asking the court to determine whether the ticket sale was valid to begin with, and if so, who the lawful owner of the ticket is and who is entitled to its prize.
Hopefully, the court can make its decision before May 23, 2026, otherwise the ticket will have reached its 180-day expiration date and will not be paid out to anybody.
Thanks to Clay for the tip.
I think the winning ticket should go to the manager of the Circle K since he purchased it. It was smart of him to realize that the winning ticket may be in the stack of unpaid for tickets and purchase the ticket for himself.
"Filings say Gawlitza clocked out, removed his company uniform, and bought some of the tickets from another employee for $10, after which he signed the back of the ticket worth $12.8 million."
Very Smart on his part. Most likely a policy that you can not purchase lottery tickets while on duty. I am rooting for Robert on this one & hope he prevails.
"If a retailer accepts a returned draw game ticket from a player or generates a draw game ticket refused by the player and the retailer does not resell the ticket, the Lottery shall deem the draw game ticket to be owned by the retailer."
Does not specify a time before/after the draw has concluded that a returned ticket can be purchased. Should the rules state at the time of the draw any returned tickets are property of the retailer, then he would be SOL.
I bet the original customer that ordered $85 worth is doing a self beat down after learning about this.
* Strongly consider taking a chance if you see returned tickets, when you purchase yours.
Returned tickets have odds that are just as crummy as any other lottery tickets, so I wouldn't buy them just because they were returned (printed by mistake or the would-be player didn't have enough money).
What retailers should do, like any retailer with excess merchandise, is offer them at 50% off. I'll buy them.
Some time ago, I requested A multi state lottery ticket over ten draws. This was before you could use a form to fill out what you wanted. The clerk made a mistake and printed ten tickets for one drawing with the same numbers. Then she had the gall to ask if I wanted them. I'll bet they sold them to customers that came later. The numbers never hit, so no one was affected.
This is my Recommendation a friendly settlement everyone happy. 😃 The original owner that didn't pay $1,000,000 . The employee $1,000,000. All the other employees at that store $50,000 each. The rest build a new Circle ⭕️ k with Super lotto lounge for Players the best part free soda 🥤 if you buy something at the store 🏬 lol Like China 🇨🇳 says Win Win 🏆 for everyone 😁🥷
* l am on a different flight here. At the TIME of the drawing " who owned the unclaimed tickets?" Was it the store or was it up for grabs? Is it legal for one to enrich themselves through deception?
Some great case law will be made one way or another in this matter. I assume these stores are like a franchise but if the contract is silent on the issue, it may be split between Citcle K and the store manager (owner?). The Circle k website says it uses a hybrid model for the stores so this may control the outcome along with what has been the standard practice for leftover tickets.
Update: It looks like individual stores are required to pay for unsold tickets so the individual store owner might win after all.
85.00$ of tickets were printed of which a customer only paid for 60.00$ and left the remaining 25.00$ worth of tickets. Those remaining tickets sat in the store after the drawing was conducted. An employee learned that the jackpot winning ticket was sold at the store he works in. He decides to check the pile of rejected tickets and finds the winning ticket. Surely this isn't the first time there was a pile of rejected tickets that were printed and couldn't be cancelled and the store had to eat those tickets, but it was the first time a big winner was amongst the rejected pile. The only way the employee could garner the winning ticket was to clock out and purchase the ticket as a civilian. Hate to say this but I think all rejected tickets belong to the store since they cannot be cancelled and they have to absorb the cost. The employee should have just put 25.00$ in the register, take the rejected tickets and have a friend or relative cash the ticket
Can you buy the tickets after the drawing has occurred? I don't think he wins the jackpot if he did this.
I think the owner and employee should share 50% 50%.
Was the ticket created before the draw ? Appears to be
Was the ticket legally sold to a person who can legally purchase it ?? Appears to be
Can the legally printed/not-yet-sold ticket be purchased after the draw ??
Does the Manager have any history of buying returned tickets, after any previous draws ?
This will be interesting if/when it gets to a court and not in the Lottery Commissions hands.
There has to be a legal basis and this case is novel and will set precedent. The other employees have no arguable legal claim.
These proposals of tossing $ to everyone even remotely connected always concern me. It reminds me of some members proposing that the DC guy who claimed he won PB by playing wrongly posted numbers and members thought he should be given some $ for his trouble.
I like how he changed clothes to appear off the street, creative.
Tony Numbers, In Nevada having someone else cash the ticket or even making bets is called 'sending in a beard'. There are some very good sports bettors and if they personally showed up to make their bets there would be players after them saying " I want $100 worth of what he or she bet".