Arizona Lottery delays expiration date of $12.8 million jackpot-winning ticket in legal battle

Comment #31

KY Floyd — Thu, 28 May 2026 05:37:13 GMT

If some of them were QPs the ultimate irony would be if she decided based on the numbers she got, and she didn't like the numbers on the winning ticket.

There's some logic in the store asking her to keep them in the order they were issued, but I'd expect most stores to let the customer choose unless the store thought some were less likely to appeal to a later customer. IIRC a while back somebody posted about a store having a multi-draw ticket with a bunch of game panels. Again, IIRC, the tic... [ More ]

Comment #30

justadream — Tue, 26 May 2026 21:02:20 GMT

I wonder who choose what tickets she would get to keep ? The tickets in order up to the amount available on her debit card should have been which ones she got.

Comment #29

Participant — Tue, 26 May 2026 05:41:22 GMT

I just want to clarify on this comment. The ticket became the exclusive property of Circle K when the would be purchaser abandoned the purchase because of insufficient funds.

The prize became Circle K's at the instance of the completion of the Drawing.

Comment #28

KY Floyd — Tue, 26 May 2026 05:22:05 GMT

Evidently it must have been against company policy for employees to purchase rejected tickets

The stories I've seen have said the policy is that employees can't buy (any) lottery tickets at the store they work at , not just while they're working. There's also the whole deception angle of attempting to buy the ticket in the hopes that the company didn't yet know they owned a ticket worth far more than face value. I don't see any way that it was a lawful sale/purchase.

Unprecedented move... [ More ]

Comment #27

Participant — Tue, 26 May 2026 00:27:15 GMT

You are Welcome

Comment #26

justadream — Tue, 26 May 2026 00:12:22 GMT

Thank you for your answer.

Comment #25

Participant — Mon, 25 May 2026 23:25:23 GMT

It actually became theirs at the instance of the drawing and no need to purchase what was already theirs.

Comment #24

justadream — Mon, 25 May 2026 22:21:33 GMT

The ticket would have to be purchased by Circle K before the draw in order for it to be theirs

Comment #23

Participant — Mon, 25 May 2026 21:55:07 GMT

In the case of the lottery club the group made the determination to include a member who did not contribute to the drawing purchase. The Group did not see criminal conduct or in your words cheating .

In this case It is not rocket science to know that purchasing a winning lottery ticket for a dollar or two is an improper purchase. Cheating is not the right word. Cheating does not apply because the purchase itself is null and void ab initio (from the beginning).

I did write that Circle K m... [ More ]

Comment #22

Tucker Black — Mon, 25 May 2026 19:17:15 GMT

Paying for a ticket after it's determined to be a winner (in this case and the lottery club you mentioned) is not gambling. It's cheating.

The ticket belongs to Circle K. By policy, they are required to buy the ticket when no one else does prior to the drawing. The money gets taken out of their lottery account the instant it is printed.

Comment #21

gvpazkn — Mon, 25 May 2026 08:54:14 GMT

A n unprecedented move by the AZ Lottery, extending the expiration date, which would have been yesterday(May 23). What future problems will arise by extending the expiration date of the winning ticket? I can think of hundreds. And this extension of the expire date was all at the request of Circle K. They probably do have an interest in being awarded this money. Now the manager cannot be located to be served his summons. HMMM....did he quit? Doubt it. Did Circle K fire him. Probably. Will his abs... [ More ]

Comment #20

Participant — Mon, 25 May 2026 00:35:46 GMT

Circle K may have a higher legal claim to the ticket.

The player that caused the printing of the ticket has a higher moral and justifiable reasons to the ticket and prize.

The ticket value after the drawing ($12.8 Million) is no longer the same as the value (1 or 2 dollars) before the drawing and to this extents, Gawitzer's purchase of the ticket at the pre-drawing price is fraudulent and the sale is void ab initio.

The Contest reduces to Circle K and the original purchaser.

The... [ More ]

Comment #19

Scoommo — Sat, 23 May 2026 13:40:23 GMT

The manager forgot two things.

1. At 11 pm or whatever time they draw the numbers, Circle K then became the winner of the ticket because no one had purchased it before draw time.

2. Stores cannot sell a draw ticket after the draw time/date.

Comment #18

Scoommo — Sat, 23 May 2026 13:32:08 GMT

If Arizona's law prevails then technically Circle K is the winner. The customer declined to purchase the ticket and no one else purchased it (before draw time) so that means at drawing time, Circle K became the rightful owner. The manager knew it was a winner and tried to buy it, however stores cannot sell a lottery ticket after the draw date

Comment #17

justadream — Fri, 22 May 2026 18:25:52 GMT

Naming a person in a suit does not necessarily imply it would be in their favor.

Comment #16

Brock Lee — Fri, 22 May 2026 17:09:12 GMT

Even if Circle K was a charity why would they want any money to go to the person who used a debit card to buy other tickets but was never a purchaser of the winning ticket? I suppose there's a possibility that they'd like to give them a modest amount since Circle K would never have become the lawful owner of a jackpot winning ticket if it weren't for that person, but I can't imagine any reason they'd ever suggest the ticket belongs to that person instead of Circle K.

this is a p.r. win... [ More ]

Comment #15

gvpazkn — Fri, 22 May 2026 13:14:14 GMT

Unprecedented move by the AZ lottery, delaying the expiration date of the ticket in question. This opens up a whole lot of questions as to the expiration date of future tickets when there is a dispute in collecting winnings. Did not need to go down this path. Let the ticket expire. End of dispute and controversy.

Comment #14

Tony Numbers — Fri, 22 May 2026 10:09:54 GMT

KY-- many stores offer rejected tickets for sale. Granted nobody would purchase one after the draw date, unless they saw that the ticket was a winner. Gawlitza left the store, changed his clothes, returned and purchased a ticket he knew was a winner. Evidently it must have been against company policy for employees to purchase rejected tickets

Comment #13

KY Floyd — Fri, 22 May 2026 06:00:56 GMT

Kreamer said that he would sign an order that would compel the bank to come forward with those details so that the key party can be named in the lawsuit.

Named in the lawsuit or subpoenaed as a witness? It might be useful to have the original prospective buyer testify that the reports that they requested all of the tickets but chose not to buy some of them are correct, but AFAIK they've never come forward (or why the need to use the debit card to identify them?) to assert a claim of ownersh... [ More ]

Comment #12

Tony Numbers — Fri, 22 May 2026 00:58:22 GMT

The ticket was technically resold, the knucklehead Gawlitza bought it. Why he didn't give it to a family member to cash it in we will never know.

Comment #11

Scoommo — Fri, 22 May 2026 00:02:35 GMT

It belongs to the store. According to the article, the customer declined the printed ticket and Arizona lottery rules states, that when that happens the retailer gets to keep the ticket, provided he does not resell it.

The Manager, fraudulently purchased the ticket because he knew it was a winner. Who in their right mind would purchase a day old lottery ticket

Comment #10

Tony Numbers — Thu, 21 May 2026 22:33:16 GMT

Arizona rules state that any tickets printed for a player that are refused by said player are the property of the retailer that printed it so long as the retailer does not manage to sell it. Gawitzer bought the ticket so it should belong to him. Why he doesn't have possession of the ticket or why he's hiding is the big mystery

Comment #9

Brock Lee — Thu, 21 May 2026 19:46:27 GMT

that part is the mystery. it looks like gawlitza has given up his claim and no longer cares.

Comment #8

Tony Numbers — Thu, 21 May 2026 19:16:52 GMT

Suppose you cannot find your jackpot winning ticket and you have one week to claim it. Will a judge extend the deadline so you might be able to find it?? This ruling just proves that expiration deadlines are horse poop

Comment #7

welington — Thu, 21 May 2026 18:37:43 GMT

Extending deadline is wrong .Now they need to extend deadline for anyone who requests it to be extended. They should have cash the ticket and place in escrow

Comment #6

noise-gate — Thu, 21 May 2026 17:41:53 GMT

*The report said the owner of the ticket declined it, more like ( forgot ) it at the store. It's why Bank of America is now involved.

* According to the article, the ticket was purchased using a debit card. Seems the purchase was legitimate and Circle K wants the money going to the original purchaser, just not Gawlitza.

Comment #5

justadream — Thu, 21 May 2026 15:51:07 GMT

Purchasing a ticket under false pretenses will make it invalid . The employee knew it was a winner before purchasing it. On the clock or off it was still purchased under false pretenses.

Comment #4

Onelast8 — Thu, 21 May 2026 14:43:01 GMT

Now the court has agreed to a expiration extension, they have set a precedent for future arguments over a lottery ticket. This ruling only applies to the Arizona State lottery games and MUSCL lottery games not apply for future possible disputes over a Mega Million or Powerball ticket but it will be challenged.

Comment #3

Mom585* — Thu, 21 May 2026 14:00:25 GMT

It belongs to the initial purchaser. If she left it it shouldve been canceled, but The worker knew it won which is why he brought it. Think we need more details.

Comment #2

mypiemaster — Thu, 21 May 2026 13:16:30 GMT

Can you imagine if you were the one that purchased that ticket, and had to give it back for whatever reason. Life sucks sometimes.

Comment #1

mightwin1 — Thu, 21 May 2026 13:03:36 GMT

If the employee bought the ticket, why/how did the store get ahold of the actual ticket

Arizona Lottery delays expiration date of $12.8 million jackpot-winning ticket in legal battle

Lottery Post — Thu, 21 May 2026 11:20:26 GMT

Court will decide who owns the ticket after last-minute exemption

By Kate Northrop

The Arizona Lottery granted a retailer's request to extend the expiration deadline of a $12.8 million Arizona Lottery jackpot-winning ticket while the court figures out who is legally entitled to the prize.

Just days before a $12.8 million winning ticket for The Pick was about to expire, the Arizona Lottery extended its lifespan so the court could have more time to decide who rightfully owns it.

In... [ More ]