A New Hampshire woman who won a $559.7 million Powerball jackpot should be able to collect the winnings soon while a judge decides whether to let her remain anonymous.
Arguing before a judge in Nashua on Tuesday, lawyers for the woman said her privacy interests outweigh the public’s right to know, a core element of the state’s argument for disclosing her identity.
The woman, identified as Jane Doe, signed the ticket following the Jan. 6 drawing, but later learned from a lawyer that she could have shielded her identity by writing the name of a trust.
Outside the court, both sides seemed to agree the money could be transferred in the coming days into a trust the woman has set up – the Good Karma Family Trust of 2018.
Her lawyers claim the delay in payment was costing her about $14,000 a day, or about $500,000 a month in interest, and have filed a separate motion with the court to release the money.
“This money is just sitting there, doing nothing for nobody,” William Shaheen, one of the woman’s lawyers said. “It’s very important that we redeem this ticket and she gets on with her life.”
New Hampshire Lottery Executive Director Charlie McIntyre said he was inclined to honor the woman’s request, saying it was a separate issue from whether to reveal her name and address.
“We don’t want to be in a position that is adversarial with our prize winners. These are our customers,” McIntyre said.
Lawyers for the woman contend that she was already experiencing stress over the prospect of having to go public and that disclosing her identify would put her safety at risk, expose her family and friends to unwanted media attention and inundate her with harassing calls and emails from people wanting a portion of her fortune.
As part of their motion, the lawyers said their firm has received hundreds of emails. They listed requests for money from sick or homeless people and investment opportunities including an Indonesian company wanting to expand its pallet company across Asia.
“How does a person deal with all that, never mind real concerns about threats to her safety?” asked attorney Steven Gordon. “There is documented history of people being harmed, people coming into their homes.”
McIntyre countered it was in the public’s interest to know who won the jackpot and that past lottery winners have gone on to lead “productive, normal, healthy lives and enjoy the fruits of those winnings – pay for college, pay off houses, donate to good causes.”
“For us, this is about the challenge of balancing the privacy rights of the winner against the right of the public to know what the lottery does,” McIntyre said.
In court, a lawyer for the commission said the law was clear on the requirement to release her name and failing to publicize her identity could erode trust in the lottery.
“We don’t get to choose when we follow the law and when we don’t,” Assistant Attorney General John Conforti told the court. “Where there is a public interest in information within a public document, we have an obligation to disclose it. We can’t choose to avoid that obligation because it’s inconvenient or messy.”
Hillsborough County Superior Court Judge Charles Temple didn’t indicate when he would rule.