THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Saturday, September 3, 1994 TAG: 9409030478
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY MARC DAVIS, STAFF WRITER
LENGTH: Medium: 82 lines
Better keep a close eye on the guy who buys the lottery tickets for your office pool: A Chesapeake judge says lottery pools cannot be enforced under Virginia law.
The ruling Thursday by Circuit Judge E. Preston Grissom means state courts cannot force a winning ticket-holder to split the money among his pals, even if the pool-mates agreed to do so.
Lawyers on both sides of the case that spurred the ruling agree: Grissom's ruling could destroy lottery pools throughout Virginia.
``It sends a message to the person running the office lottery pool to say, `Hey, if I have the winning ticket, I can cash it in myself,' '' said Geoff Glick, who represented four friends who claim they own part of the disputed $9 million Lotto ticket.
His opponent, lawyer J. Nelson Happy, dean of Regent University Law School, agreed.
``Now, there is no way anybody other than the person who actually submits the ticket can be assured they will be paid,'' Happy said.
Grissom made his ruling in the case of Walter Cole, a 73-year-old Elizabeth City man who bought a winning Lotto ticket in Chesapeake.
Cole and his friends were in a lottery pool. Each week, they bought several tickets together. In September 1992, Cole bought seven tickets, one of which hit the jackpot.
Cole said the winning ticket was his alone. He said he bought it 35 minutes after buying the group's six tickets. Lottery records confirm this 35-minute gap between purchases. Cole's friends, however, say the winning ticket was part of the pool.
On Thursday, Judge Grissom sidestepped the issue. He ruled that the feuding friends are governed by North Carolina law, which forbids any ``gaming contract.'' Even if the friends had a pool, he ruled, it was illegal. He gave the ticket to Cole.
If Grissom had stopped there, the case would have had no effect in Virginia.
Instead, Grissom went a step further: He ruled that Virginia law also bans gaming contracts, even pools for the legal, state-sponsored lottery.
That means that friends and relatives can still share lottery jackpots as a matter of honor, Grissom said, but they cannot ask the court to enforce their agreements.
Grissom said he will write his ruling next week. It will be appealed to the Virginia Supreme Court, Glick said.
For now, Grissom's ruling is binding only on Cole and his friends.
``If it doesn't go higher than that, then you can say, `Well, that's just one judge's opinion,' '' Happy said. ``But if it goes to the Supreme Court then that will define the law.''
All this is news to the state Lottery Department.
For 4 1/2 years, the department has let groups claim Lotto prizes. Seven groups have claimed Lotto jackpots, including four in Hampton Roads.
In each case, members of the group are asked to sign a document called ``Agreement To Share Ownership And Proceeds Of Lottery Ticket.'' The document states, in part, ``This request was made because of a pre-existing agreement between me and the parties listed.''
That means the Virginia Lottery recognizes that pools exist and are legal - an apparent contradiction to Grissom's ruling. No one could cite another court decision in Virginia to support or contradict Grissom's ruling.
Lottery spokeswoman Paula Otto said she could not reconcile the Lottery Department's policy with Grissom's ruling. She said lottery officials will wait until the judge puts his opinion in writing to decide what to do next.
Meanwhile, Otto said, ``It is fair to say that this (Cole) case has heightened the awareness of those people who do play in groups for the need for a good understanding and some kind of checks and balances, such as copying the tickets'' for all members.
But if Grissom's ruling stands, even that won't be enough.
In that event, Happy said, ``You have to trust your friends, right?'' Otherwise, ``You want to be the guy who hands in the ticket.'' ILLUSTRATION: ASSOCIATED PRESS file photo
In August 1990, members of a Harrisonburg lottery pool claimed the
group's one-third share of a $16.8 million prize. Such agreements
are ``gaming contracts,'' a judge ruled.
KEYWORDS: VIRGINIA LOTTERY LOTTERY POOL by CNB