Million-dollar ticket fight goes before Mass. Lottery board

Comment #22

KY Floyd — Sun, 04 Dec 2005 04:26:11 GMT

Drivedabizness wrote:<< All the legal mumbo-jumbo is intersting - but hardly on point. Lawsuit after lawsuit has been settled (I suppose since I'm evidently dealing with attorneys I should say decided) according to the principle that lotteries can't decide these kinds of issues. >>How could the legal mumbo jumbo not be on point in a legal case? Similar legal cases exist exactly because the courts can decide these issues, though there's no guarantee that they'll decide them properly since th... [ More ]

Comment #21

bellyache — Fri, 02 Dec 2005 21:09:00 GMT

I believe that the guy didn't know he had a winning ticket. Like others have said, he just looked at the code and tossed it thinking it was a loser. Because I doubt most people would just toss their winning tickets out in the garbage.

Comment #20

Drivedabizness — Fri, 02 Dec 2005 16:38:26 GMT

All the legal mumbo-jumbo is intersting - but hardly on point. Lawsuit after lawsuit has been settled (I suppose since I'm evidently dealing with attorneys I should say decided) according to the principle that lotteries can't decide these kinds of issues. Hence, tickets are bearer instruments - you walk in with it and the lottery pays you. They also go to great pains to tell people sign the back of your ticket specifically so these kinds of things don't happen. I would think there would have... [ More ]

Comment #19

csfb — Fri, 02 Dec 2005 08:05:19 GMT

Holder of a bearer instrument is presumed to be the owner. It is not a conclusive presumption and can be disputed. If it is proved that such instrument has been lost or misplaced by the rightful owner, finder must return it to the owner. When a property is lost or misplaced, there is no relinquishment of ownership. Finder does not automatically own the property. By law he must exercise due diligence in finding the owner. If no rightful claimant comes forth, than finder can claim ownership.... [ More ]

Comment #18

DIAMOND RAY — Thu, 01 Dec 2005 19:26:40 GMT

I occasionally pick up disgarded tickets and have won with a few. Lets face it the purpose of playing the lottery is to win if you buy a ticket and don't make sure it's a winner or not than you don't need to be THROWING AWAY YOUR MONEY . I DON'T THINK THE GUY KNEW HE HAD A WINNERS SO HE DID DISGARD IT AND NOT MISPLACE IT, BECAUSE IF HE DID HE WOULDN'T HAVE JUST LAYED IT TO THE SIDE MY JUDGEMENT IS FOR THE Saint. GOD BLESS

Comment #17

jeffrey — Thu, 01 Dec 2005 12:22:46 GMT

I think you missed the point of Bearer Instrument. Payment upon request with the relinquishment of the instrument. Case closed. You can be sued for anything. I wish someone would dump some bearer bonds in the trash for me to find.

Comment #16

jeffrey — Thu, 01 Dec 2005 12:20:37 GMT

Exactly, I wish the lawyers who read this site would get definitions straight. Prior ownership is not an issue of a bearer instrument. However, anyone can be sued in this country for anything. God bless America, I hope it survives.

Comment #15

bellyache — Thu, 01 Dec 2005 07:02:52 GMT

CASH, Mr. St John isn't suing anyone...he is the one being sued. He probably is just hoping he wins the case so he can collect he money.

Comment #14

four4me — Thu, 01 Dec 2005 06:09:15 GMT

bearer instrumentDefinitionA negotiable instrument which is payable on demand to the holder, regardless of whom it was originally issued to.

Comment #13

JAP69 — Thu, 01 Dec 2005 05:55:24 GMT

Dumpster diving rule number 1 If it's in the dumpster it's fair game

Comment #12

RJOh — Thu, 01 Dec 2005 02:03:16 GMT

If Doyle's argument works for his anonymous client, then it will work for anyone who can prove they were in the White Hen Pantry that day. Some of Doyle's remarks have been disputed by some of the store's workers and once someone start making up part of a story, the whole story becomes doubtful.

Comment #11

DoubleDown — Thu, 01 Dec 2005 01:18:39 GMT

What the

Comment #10

KY Floyd — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 23:12:49 GMT

Bearer instrument just means that the issuer doesn't keep a record of the owner or any changes in ownership, but does nothing to prove that the person in possession is actually the owner. The role of the court is to decide who the rightful owner is in the case of a dispute. Deliberately discarding property means you've willfully relinquished ownership, but if you lose something you still own it for a period of time defined by law, and the law also spells out the procedure for the finder to beco... [ More ]

Comment #9

JAP69 — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 21:50:30 GMT

St. John is entitled to the winnings, the lottery has said, because lottery tickets are bearer instruments, payable to whoever possesses and signs the back of them. St. John meets all the requirements, according to the lottery.That says it all about ownership of a ticket. Unless it was stolen from you and you can prove it

Comment #8

BabyJC — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 21:47:34 GMT

Given the circumstances, the lottery should not withhold payment to St. John

Comment #7

hsvscubaski — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 21:18:09 GMT

He can sell the annuity for cash. Won't get top dollar butstill most of it.

Comment #6

DoubleDown — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 20:39:59 GMT

I agree- but I bet that if the game was an annuity game, it will be tough to get them to change the payout.He will be forced to live until he is 108 to see it all- a damn shame.

Comment #5

jeffrey — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 19:25:56 GMT

When will the courts understand the phrase Bearer Instrument ? These cases should be treated as frivolous and dismissed. What a waste of time and money.Finders keepers losers weepers.Congrats to you Mr. St. John.Doyle, your parents should be proud, hats off to your mother and her brother.

Comment #4

Bradly_60 — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 18:14:25 GMT

Really...I don't see how you can manage to throw away a million dollar winner. He obviously was just scratching the letters to see if it was a winner, say that the numbers didn't mean anything (large prizes don't have any specific letters corresponding to the prize. In Michigan anything over $25 doesn't have set letters.) He threw it away, hes the dumb ass, and now he bought a million dollars for someone else.Brad

Comment #3

CASH Only — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 18:08:43 GMT

Mr St John should focus on suing to collect his prize in lump-sum, as it was an annuity-only ticket. He is 83 years old. Do you remember 94 (at the time)-yo Louise Outing

Comment #2

bellyache — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 17:56:59 GMT

I really hope St. John gets to keep the ticket. This has been an interesting saga. I hope we continue to hear whats going on with this case.

Comment #1

DoubleDown — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 17:12:08 GMT

Finders Keepers !!Yes Indeed it is a bearer instrument-Too bad for the person that misplaced the ticket in the trash can .I guess he misplaced it in the trash can like I just did with my subway sandwich wrapper .

Million-dollar ticket fight goes before Mass. Lottery board

Lottery Post — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 17:03:41 GMT

In the opening round of what may be a lengthy legal battle, an 83-year-old local man who found a winning Massachusetts lottery ticket in a trash bin defended his right to the $1 million prize yesterday, fending off a rival claim.The hearing, at the headquarters of the Massachusetts Lottery Commission in Braintree, was largely an exercise in legal technicalities.The commission said earlier this month is had already rejected a counterclaim on a ticket found by Edward St. John in a trash bin at the... [ More ]