Representative of Hot Lotto winner named in lawsuit

Jan 20, 2012, 8:57 am (17 comments)

Hot Lotto

The case of the most mysterious jackpot winner in the history of the Iowa Lottery got even more convoluted Thursday.

The attorney who represents a trust attempting to claim a multimillion-dollar Hot Lotto jackpot faces legal troubles in Delaware, court documents show.

Crawford Shaw, who is trying to claim a jackpot worth much as $14.2 million on behalf of his client, Hexam Investments Trust, is being sued over his involvement in a now-bankrupt company called Industrial Enterprises of America Inc.

Shaw was chief executive of the company, which sold aftermarket motor oil, windshield wiper solution and other automobile fluids, until 2005, when he was forced out. He sued Industrial Enterprises after his removal and received a settlement ultimately worth about $2.3 million.

"I sued them and I won," Shaw said in a telephone interview with The Des Moines Register on Thursday. "I don't know anything about this other lawsuit people are talking about."

The settlement made Shaw a consultant, but according to the lawsuit — filed in April in Delaware, where Industrial Enterprises is incorporated — he was not required to do any work or provide any services in exchange for stock shares, which he later sold.

The lawsuit alleges that the settlement terms were illegal, and that Shaw, while not accused of criminal wrongdoing, received stock that was impermissibly issued.

The lawsuit also says company leaders used this type of stock compensation arrangement to defraud investors of more than $110 million and force Industrial Enterprises into bankruptcy.

The company's top officials after Shaw's ouster — James Margulies and John Mazzuto — have both been convicted on securities fraud and other charges in New York, court records show.

Shaw first came to Iowans' attention on Dec. 29. His signature adorned the back of the Hot Lotto ticket that had been held for nearly a year.

Less than two hours before it was to expire, two attorneys from the Davis Brown firm in Des Moines delivered the ticket, signed by Shaw as trustee for Hexam, to lottery officials.

Shaw declined to tell the Register who is behind Hexam or whether the trust consists of an individual or group of people. He didn't reveal the information to lottery officials either, said Mary Neubauer, Iowa Lottery spokesman.

Shaw said he and the lottery "have agreed to keep everything confidential until it is all worked out. We're making progress."

Shaw met with Iowa Lottery officials for about 90 minutes Tuesday, but no resolution was reached on the prize.

The Iowa Lottery has not awarded the jackpot and continues to investigate whether the ticket was legally obtained and possessed, Neubauer said.

The ticket was purchased Dec. 23, 2010, at a QuikTrip in northeast Des Moines.

The Iowa Lottery is one of 15 state lotteries that pool resources to offer jackpots starting at $1 million in Hot Lotto, a numbers game similar to Powerball. Since the ticket was purchased in Iowa, the responsibility of investigating the claim and awarding the prize falls to Iowa Lottery officials.

The ticket played two sets of numbers over the next five drawings. The winning numbers hit on the second drawing, Dec. 29, 2010. The ticket was worth $16.5 million at the time.

Shaw sent the ticket by Federal Express to the Davis Brown firm, whose lawyers drove the ticket to Iowa Lottery headquarters on Grand Avenue in Des Moines 1 hour and 10 minutes before the ticket was to expire.

Since then, lottery officials have investigated how the ticket made it from a Des Moines convenience store into the hands of a 76-year-old lawyer living in Bedford, N.Y.

Lottery officials have said they will not award the prize until the person or persons behind the trust are revealed.

Iowa law requires a winner to give his name and address when claiming a prize. The winner does not have to make a public appearance or a public statement, though most have done so.

Lottery security personnel remain curious about why the jackpot went unclaimed for so long, Neubauer said.

Des Moines Register

Comments

dr65's avatardr65

I've reconsidered...now it's STINK, STANK, STUNK.

mcginnin56

Quote: Originally posted by dr65 on Jan 20, 2012

I've reconsidered...now it's STINK, STANK, STUNK.

It's the grinch who tried stealing the Hot Lotto!   I Agree!   Puke

peppy007

They should turn this into reality TV. Can u imagine the ratings since we ll all know is for real and not some made up fake show.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

This is gettin' curiouser and curiouser.

Cletu$2's avatarCletu$2

Something stinks.But is it the Iowa lottery or the lawyers?Time will tell,I suppose.As rdgrnr says,it's getting curiouser and curiouser.

winwi5

The lottery office is always trying to find a reason not to pay out and i don't see anything wrong the lottery offices are greedy and crooks themeselves their will be alot of people that will claim their winnings in a trust. I know i would because i don't want or need to go public with my winnings i feel like all states should be anonymous.

PERDUE

If I throw enough distractions in your direction, you will eventually forget about the original focus. Which is representing a person(s) who wished to remain unknown.

Divide and conquer.

Success rate almost 100%.

This story is beginning to look like a card trick or the shell game.

Am I the only one that sees this?

Coin Toss's avatarCoin Toss

A poster here named justxploring once joked that something like this would happen and the winner would have to go to court to prove they have a right to remain anonymous- and win the case but become famous for doing so!

Green laugh

Stack47

Quote: Originally posted by winwi5 on Jan 20, 2012

The lottery office is always trying to find a reason not to pay out and i don't see anything wrong the lottery offices are greedy and crooks themeselves their will be alot of people that will claim their winnings in a trust. I know i would because i don't want or need to go public with my winnings i feel like all states should be anonymous.

"The lottery office is always trying to find a reason not to pay out  "

I've only been to a lottery office once and they bent over backward answering all my questions. Do you have an actual example when a lottery office refused to pay your legitimate winnings?

"i feel like all states should be anonymous."

And then you'll probably say there was no winner and the lottery office is keeping all the money. Here's a suggestion, if you don't like the rules don't play.

mcginnin56

Quote: Originally posted by Stack47 on Jan 21, 2012

"The lottery office is always trying to find a reason not to pay out  "

I've only been to a lottery office once and they bent over backward answering all my questions. Do you have an actual example when a lottery office refused to pay your legitimate winnings?

"i feel like all states should be anonymous."

And then you'll probably say there was no winner and the lottery office is keeping all the money. Here's a suggestion, if you don't like the rules don't play.

Excellent point Stack. When people complain about the option of being anonymous, they are not thinking long term. If all lottery wins were anonymous, there would be considerable doubt about the validity and integrity of any such lottery. In general, people need to put a face & name to all large lotto wins so that they feel they also have a remote chance of winning.    Thumbs Up

savagegoose's avatarsavagegoose

Quote: Originally posted by Coin Toss on Jan 20, 2012

A poster here named justxploring once joked that something like this would happen and the winner would have to go to court to prove they have a right to remain anonymous- and win the case but become famous for doing so!

Green laugh

lol classic

larry3100's avatarlarry3100

If I won a big jackpot in the lottery and wanted to get my win done through a trust,I should have that right.But if it came down to an investigation to whether or not I got that lottery win,I would reveal myself to the Lottery Commission.I would tell them where I bought that winning ticket.No way I would let the Lottery Commission deny me my jackpot!.

NightStalker's avatarNightStalker

Quote: Originally posted by larry3100 on Jan 21, 2012

If I won a big jackpot in the lottery and wanted to get my win done through a trust,I should have that right.But if it came down to an investigation to whether or not I got that lottery win,I would reveal myself to the Lottery Commission.I would tell them where I bought that winning ticket.No way I would let the Lottery Commission deny me my jackpot!.

Ditto!  Thumbs Up  I'm not going to let a little thing like anonymity get between me and my new Ferrari.

savagegoose's avatarsavagegoose

maybe it is the bankrupt lawyers ticket? if i was a banrupt and won the loto wahat a bitter pill , actually  paying my debts instead of  spending all that money! 

i can understand mainly  how a bankrupt would take 364days and 22 hours to claim a prize, and still want to not tell ANYONE who they are.

and seriously,  its not the lotto people knowing who you are its the public, oh and maaybe state solvency agencies, through out the  united states.

desert's avatardesert

Quote: Originally posted by winwi5 on Jan 20, 2012

The lottery office is always trying to find a reason not to pay out and i don't see anything wrong the lottery offices are greedy and crooks themeselves their will be alot of people that will claim their winnings in a trust. I know i would because i don't want or need to go public with my winnings i feel like all states should be anonymous.

I'm a new poster here so please treat me with kid gloves at first.

With that said...being anonymous is fine if one doesn't care to field the typical questions from a reporter, "How does it feel to be a winner?", "what are your plans?" (and my favorite) "will the win affect your life?". States do allow winners to beg off the publicity and pictures, Arizona being one of them. However, there is a Public Records law that would reveal the winners name. The general public won't know that you're the winner unless they make a Public Records request and the website will show "anonymous" as the winner if it shows up at all. But since the monies being paid are technically states monies (states money...state monies?), a record has to be maintained showing the recipients name, address, amount won and then the tax thing will be given to the appropiate agencies.

There has to be a paper trail. Total anonymity isn't going to happen.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by desert on Jan 24, 2012

I'm a new poster here so please treat me with kid gloves at first.

With that said...being anonymous is fine if one doesn't care to field the typical questions from a reporter, "How does it feel to be a winner?", "what are your plans?" (and my favorite) "will the win affect your life?". States do allow winners to beg off the publicity and pictures, Arizona being one of them. However, there is a Public Records law that would reveal the winners name. The general public won't know that you're the winner unless they make a Public Records request and the website will show "anonymous" as the winner if it shows up at all. But since the monies being paid are technically states monies (states money...state monies?), a record has to be maintained showing the recipients name, address, amount won and then the tax thing will be given to the appropiate agencies.

There has to be a paper trail. Total anonymity isn't going to happen.

Welcome to Lottery Post, desert, and best of luck to you!

Now, when can we take the kid gloves off?

KY Floyd's avatarKY Floyd

Quote: Originally posted by desert on Jan 24, 2012

I'm a new poster here so please treat me with kid gloves at first.

With that said...being anonymous is fine if one doesn't care to field the typical questions from a reporter, "How does it feel to be a winner?", "what are your plans?" (and my favorite) "will the win affect your life?". States do allow winners to beg off the publicity and pictures, Arizona being one of them. However, there is a Public Records law that would reveal the winners name. The general public won't know that you're the winner unless they make a Public Records request and the website will show "anonymous" as the winner if it shows up at all. But since the monies being paid are technically states monies (states money...state monies?), a record has to be maintained showing the recipients name, address, amount won and then the tax thing will be given to the appropiate agencies.

There has to be a paper trail. Total anonymity isn't going to happen.

It's only a public record if the law says it is, and in states that allow anonymity that information isn't a public record. I believe there have been cases where the lottery didn't publicize the name of a winner, but since there wasn't a specific allowance to remain anonymous the information was released due to a lawful request.

End of comments
Subscribe to this news story