What happens if a person hits the Powerball during a divorce? A Bucks County divorce lawyer who is lucky enough to have a client hit the lottery, better know how to advise them properly. It comes down to timing of when the ticket is purchased and when the winning occurs. As you can guess, there is limited case law since lottery is a horrible game of chance.
Livingston v. Unis suggested that lottery proceeds won during parties' marriage was marital property. Appellant's ex-wife entered into a decree of equitable distribution that entitled her to her ex-husband's lottery winnings. Prior to the decree, appellee creditor obtained a judgment by confession against the ex-husband and obtained a writ of attachment garnishing the lottery proceeds. The trial court determined that appellee creditor's garnishment was proper and that it was not affected by the later decree of equitable distribution. Appellant sought review. On appeal, the court affirmed. The court held that the trial court exceeded the scope of Pa. R. Civ. P. 3118 by doing more than maintaining the status quo, but affirmed because appellant failed to show prejudice. Further, the court held that appellee creditor's garnishment was a proper judicial order under § 8 of the Lottery Law, 72 P.S. § 3761-8, that the garnishment had priority over the decree of equitable distribution, and that the lottery proceeds, although marital property, were not immune from attachment by creditors. In addition, the court held that appellee Pennsylvania State Lottery was not immune from attachment and garnishment because it was engaged in a commercial-like venture.
Additionally, in Nuhfer v. Nuhfer stated that lottery proceeds received post-separation are marital preoprty because ticket was purchased during the marriage. Seven months prior to his separation from appellee ex-wife, appellant ex-husband participated in an office lottery pool. Subsequently, one of appellant's co-workers filed the winning ticket with the lottery bureau, claiming ownership of the winning ticket. The co-worker maintained that she had purchased the winning ticket with her own funds, and not those of the office lottery pool; however, appellant and several co-workers brought suit claiming an ownership interest in the lottery ticket. Appellant's suit reached a settlement, the terms of which, remained confidential. The court held that appellant's cause of action against the co-worker accrued when he contributed to the purchase price of the lottery ticket, which was before his separation from appellee; therefore, the payment received as a result of the settlement of appellant's claim was marital property subject to equitable distribution, pursuant to 23 Pa. Const. Stat. § 401(e)(8). As such, the court affirmed the order that included the settlement proceeds as marital property subject to equitable distribution.