Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Sickly lottery loser sues for cut of $99m office jackpot

 

Guy Adams
Monday 05 September 2011 19:00 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Edward Hairston's timing could not have been worse. After paying into a work lottery syndicate for more than eight years, he thought his luck was finally in when the group won $99m (£62m) – only to learn that his co-workers had cut him out, he alleges, when he was off sick.

Mr Hairston, 39, says he was a member of the office lottery pool at KraftMaid, an Ohio cabinet-making company, for nearly a decade before becoming unable to continue pay when a back injury forced him to take an extended period of sick leave. The syndicate scooped the rollover jackpot in August. Mr Hairston's lawyers now argue that he was "cheated" out of a share of the pot because the syndicate gave him no way of remaining a member while he was off work.

A judge has ordered the Ohio State Lottery to set aside $2m of the jackpot until the case is concluded. The outcome will most likely hinge on whether the syndicate covered the contributions of members who were off work. Hairston contends that they did; his 22 colleagues say otherwise.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in