BAKERSFIELD, Calif. — A year after winning the big $51 million Mega Millions jackpot, Bakersfield resident Etta May Urquhart took her son to court saying he commandeered the money and went on a spending spree.
(See Woman accuses son of taking $51 million lottery ticket, Lottery Post, May 6, 2012.)
Well, that lawsuit has now been quietly dismissed following a settlement agreement.
"I checked it twice before I went outside because I couldn't believe it," Urquhart told 17 News in May 2011.
Grinning from ear to ear, 75-year-old Etta May Urquhart sat beside her son Ronnie Orender in May 2011 and happily accepted the $51 million check.
But, the happy times soon ended.
The family took a $32 million lump sum payout, and Urquhart says her son hijacked the money soon after it was deposited at Moneywise Investments.
Last May, Urquhart filed a lotto lawsuit claiming Ronnie bought four different houses under his name, ten cars and a boat.
The lawsuit was dismissed as both sides carried out a settlement.
"Etta May was crying, telling me how much she loves her son Ronnie and how she has always trusted him, saying this, she said this isn't Ronnie," said attorney Barry Goldner in May 2012.
Orender who bought two homes in northwest Bakersfield, side-by-side, declined to comment Thursday, saying if he did he would be violating some of the terms of the lawsuit.
Urquhart didn't answer her door Thursday, and her attorney declined to comment, citing a confidentiality agreement signed by both sides.
But, property records suggest part of the settlement included Orender transferring title to some of the homes back to Urquhart.
Her lawsuit suggests Etta May bought the winning ticket, but was so nervous to sign paperwork to claim the winnings, she let her son sign on her behalf.
And, to deflect the media attention, Urquhart says she agreed to tell everyone she bought the ticket for her son who told us two years ago he did have plans for the money.
"Just put it in the bank and decide what kind of house we'll get and probably get some cars," said Ronnie Lee Orender in 2011.
Now it appears, the year-long battle over the cash has to come an end, though Orender's lawyer declined to say whether mother and son have reconciled.
Thanks to dallascowboyfan for the tip.
The fact that an attorney can argue on behalf of a son who raped his mother of her win-fall answers all questions as to why there is a global coalition demanding "Hell" gets upgraded before hosting some of these heartless wonders. The son in the meanwhile should be rotating between cell blocks. After all, variety is the spice of life!
I hope it's really over/settled. May both of them enjoy the money (hopefully, half, after taxes, should get divied between each, if title(s) have to be changed over ).
Probably thought that since Etta was up in years, she had no use for money. This son of theirs is a First class bottom dweller.He should serving time at Pelican Bay- California's 2nd " Alcatraz"
What on earth would you need 10 cars for
. Glad Miss Etta May is getting some of the money which she should have been getting from day one any way. Shame on the son for doing his mother like that
.
You were not there, so I find it hard to understand how you can judge so harshly? If she trusted him enough to let him sign the ticket and say "I gave it to him" she should have been happy with whatever he gave her.
I would need 10 cars to fill my TWO 6 car garages.
Strange how a mother sues her son over a lottery ticket, yet the following story has coworkers sharing their winnings with someone who did not buy in.
Classic Ronnie!
What you gonna do with the other two spaces
I know buy two more cars
I don't think he gave her anything/not much that's why she sued.
Good point, but its still true that she gave him the ticket to sign and cash.
I was thinking lounge chairs in the other 2 spaces.
Thanks, us Ronnie's have to stick together. lol.
The first story she said "he took the ticket", but in this story she said she was too nervous to sign it and wanted to "deflect the media attention" so she asked him to sign the ticket and fill out the paperwork. It looks like she is just objecting to how he is spending the money. We have no idea what the actual agreement was before she told her son to validated the ticket and it's possible she is suffering from dementia.
I believe her son did her a favor by settling out of court because if she really was too nervous to sign the ticket, I can't imagine her testimony.
The article form May 6, 2012 states he was to sign her name not his.
"But as it turns out Orender "signed the winning ticket in his own name and not on behalf of Etta May," the lawsuit said."
https://www.lotterypost.com/news/245837
It also says she used "his" $2. to buy the tickets in a statement from MegaMillions............
Last year's Mega Millions statement about the winning ticket said, "It was actually Orender's mother, Etta Urquhart, who took his $2 and bought two Mega Millions tickets at Stuarts Oak Street Mobil in Bakersfield.".
I think MegaMillions had the story strait LONG before a lawyer said "he signed his name instead of hers"
This lowlife Son was screwing his Mother over because he knows only too well that he did not buy the ticket. All he did was grin at the news conference while trying to figure out a way to get his greasy hands on the winnings. He couldn't believe his good fortune when Mother was shaking to badly to sign.
Make all the excuses one wants-Parents DO NOT take their children to court UNLESS some serious BS is being committed.
Until one finds themselves on the receiving end of such conduct one cannot side with the son... as being observed here.
Well a Mother and Son's relationship is now ruined, hopefully both figure out what really matters in life soon.
Can't trust anybody now a days..
Oh ok, I will look for the original article.
Ultimately it boils down to this: Do you take care of the woman who gave birth to you or do you throw her under the bus?
I got the quote form the story you posted.
https://www.lotterypost.com/news/245837
In the 11th paragraph.
It sounds to me like she bought tickets for him with his money. Later when she sued he settled out of court.
Parents can AND DO a lot worse than taking their children to court.
Mom is the thief in this story.
AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! When I read this, I thought of a recent case at home here in the Bahamas involving a well known lawyer who represented a man who committed a HEINOUS crime - one of the WORST in this country's history (and he ADMITTED to it), was found guilty and when I saw the news with the attorney waxing poetic about how his client got a rotten deal...all I thought was HELL AIN HOT ENOUGH FOR HIS AZZZZZZZZZ!!! Heartless wonders INDEED! On the flip side, I would love to eyeball that confi agreement!!!
With all due respect Sir Ronnie: The son did lil talking or no talking at all at the lottery winning Conference last year, the questions were addressed to her because the press recognized her as the winner- not the son. Even you must see that.
If l borrowed $2.00 or more from Sir Ronnie to play MM or PB- does that mean Ronnie won? When you come up with the correct answer, the fog will lift.
Ok, so why did she have the ticket
this makes no sense im so confused
"She later checked her Mega Millions ticket against the numbers in a newspaper, and saw she had won, the lawsuit said. Urquhart and her husband, Orender's stepfather, later went with Orender to the Mobil station where they met with lottery officials."
If one goes to the MegaMillions website, they'll see a picture of Ronnie Orender, his wife, his mother, and his stepfather. If one looks on their table, there is a huge MM promotional check lying flat ... the only name on this $51M check is "Ronnie Orender."
If days earlier, at the Mobile Gas Station, an official California Lottery Headquarters representative indicated to 74 year old Etta May Orender [who may just live another 20 years] that she should print and sign her name on the back of the ticket ... that was advice. The MM isn't responsible for if Etta May decided not to wait until a later time to do such with a steady hand, or if she quickly urged a son raised to be selfish by telling him to "Sign it." Ronnie may be a sociopath not able to jump to positing the unique question towards that nearby lottery official or without first asking his mother "Sign as my name?", or "How do I sign on behalf of your [mother's] name?"!
Possibly, Etta May caused a waste of monies towards both side's lawyer's fees. The situation is that Ronnie Orender ALREADY paid full Income Taxes on the lump sum!
We'll never know the truth concerning either of these two lucky liers/sociopaths/whatevers.
Of course he paid " full tax" as you put it because there is no way to avoid not paying tax- he could not pull a Wesley Snipes.Fact of the matter is it was not HIS MONEY to begin with. She won , not him, she went into the convenient store to purchase the ticket, not him.Just because she was shaking uncontrollably to sign the ticket does not mean ownership is transferred over to the Son.Sure his name is on the placard on the table why?- because he signed it. But theft is theft, a so called" white lie" is still a lie.If the agreement was that you sign " and make sure you take care of us"- then it was his DUTY to follow through on that.He ended up in court because he did not honor the " agreement", that is why there was a settlement. If he was so right- why not fight it in court because he knows he wil lose, there are a lot of elderly people who play the lottery, if that jury was comprised of 8 elderly persons...GAME OVER.
* One does not get into a cage match with the elderly over money in California, his attorney was smart enough to tell him so.
Crazy what money does.
"Urquhart and her husband, Orender's stepfather, later went with Orender to the Mobil station where they met with lottery officials"
AND
"It was actually Orender's mother, Etta Urquhart, who took his $2 and bought two Mega Millions tickets at Stuarts Oak Street Mobil in Bakersfield.."
So the mom buys tickets for her son with or without a verbal agreement, the ticket wins, and her and the stepfather go with the son to validate the ticket. But only the son signed the ticket and the check was issued to him. If the ticket really belonged to the mom or there was some kind of arrangement made, why wasn't it made known when they validated the ticket?
How can she prove in court is was her ticket when she said she "took his $2" to buy the ticket and was present throughout the validation process?
"she went into the convenient store to purchase the ticket, not him."
Last Saturday my sister-in-law asked me to buy her 10 PB tickets and gave me $20. Does that mean even though I bought the tickets for her with her money, the tickets are actually mine?
"One does not get into a cage match with the elderly over money in California, his attorney was smart enough to tell him so."
How do you know it wasn't her lawyer that suggested talking a settlement?
Stack47- you comparing apples & oranges. The Mother asked the Son for $2.00, the moment he handed that money over, it became hers, what she did with it from that point on is her business.For instance if she smoked cigarettes and he did not, and she bought cigarettes, can it be said its his cigarettes?-no because he handed the money over and she used it as she saw fit.If the tickets she bought were losing tickets would he be making an issue ?- no, why, because it was her decision to play or not, the case could be made for a burger or burrito. Your point is moot.
Now had your sister in law given you money to buy tickets FOR HER and they proved to be a winner in amongst them- its hers because she " instructed you to buy them"- you have zero claim to her winnings unless she decides to give you something.
I see it the same way Stack is seeing it. Mom frequently went to buy tickets and the son said.....
"Mom here is two dollars, please get me two MM tickets"
The winning ticket was his.
She gave it to him.
MM paid him.
Why would the Mother fight the Son IF in fact the Son was the lawful owner of the ticket? She could have simply congratulated him on his win..end of story- but the son was playing fast & loose hoping that his Mom & Stepdad would keel over..well surprise, those elderly people fought back...and won. You can agree with Stack all you want, it does not make it true.
By the way-What do you have against old people?
I agree, hope she can relax and enjoy life for awhile
Well said, makes people crazy.
There is an old saying " If you have a job to do,you have to do it yourself " If Etta had just taken a moment of her time and signed that freaking lotto ticket,all this shi* going to court wouldn't have taken place.
"The Mother asked the Son for $2.00, the moment he handed that money over, it became hers"
Then why didn't Mom or her husband sign the back of the ticket if it was hers?
"Now had your sister in law given you money to buy tickets FOR HER and they proved to be a winner in amongst them- its hers because she " instructed you to buy them"
That's exactly what I said happened.
"you have zero claim to her winnings unless she decides to give you something."
And Mom told the MM officials she bought the ticket for her son so why is she entitled to the winning, but I have zero claim for doing exactly the same thing?
I don't know if her son conned his mother into letting him sign the ticket and into saying she used his money to buy the tickets for him or not, but the facts show the son signed ticket, the check was issued to him, and the MM officials verified she said she bought the ticket for him. I believe she got mad when she found out her son spent $3.2 million on cars and houses and found a lawyer who would gladly accept a few thousand up front to file suit. Had the lawyer won the suit, he probably would get 10% or $3.2 million.
Apparently part of the settlement agreement is that neither side will discuss the details so we'll probably never know what it was. She may believe it was her money and her son was only managing it, but when he signed the ticket and she confirmed she bought the ticket with his money for him, the money is legally his. The reached a settlement; case closed.
Stacks47..
The Mother asked the Son for $2.00, the moment he handed that money over, it became hers"
Then why didn't Mom or her husband sign the back of the ticket if it was hers?
Answer: If you read the news report " She was shaking uncontrollably- she ASKED her son to sign for her and he SIGNED HIS OWN NAME..that is why.
"Now had your sister in law given you money to buy tickets FOR HER and they proved to be a winner in amongst them- its hers because she " instructed you to buy them"
That's exactly what I said happened.
Perhaps, but your point was about ownership of the ticket, you seemed to make it clear that since she got $2.00 from her son that her purchasing the ticket with that money somehow became his ticket, besides Ronnie agrees with you and not me. How is it possible for that to be, him agreeing with you and not me and you agreeing with me?
And Mom told the MM officials she bought the ticket for her son so why is she entitled to the winning, but I have zero claim for doing exactly the same thing?
Answer: If you read the news report: The Son TOLD the mother to tell friends that she bought the ticket for her son to deflect pressure from herself- that of course was not true- she went along with her son's suggestion despite it being a lie. Next you know, his buying houses and cars. She was conned by her boy.
she didn't want to be a burden.
Thank you.
I hope they can mend their fences. Bottom line, they are both wealthy people, and you can't take it with you. Life is short. The mother is kind of up there in age so why would you want to spend your remaining years being angry, bitter, and resentful? Forgive and forget. Shame on Ronnie.
It really does seem like he went crazy with the money and didn't take care of his mom. Maybe he should make amends. Who needs 4 houses and 10 cars? Compensating much? You can only live in one house and drive one car at a time! It seems like he was trying to impress people with his toys. Money can't buy happiness.........but it sure beats being poor!!!
If you are going to play the lottery, it's a good idea to buy your own ticket. I'm not a big fan of buying tickets for other people even if they give you the money. I've done it before, but I also don't plan on hijacking another person's jackpot either. You will definitely damage your relationships. I know I can trust myself with this responsibility but I don't think everyone can resist that temptation.
It's hard to believe that someone can actually do that to their mothers. I hope they will value their family more than money!