Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
P drove his wife and their friends, D, from Fargo, North Dakota to Winnipeg, Canada to attend the horse races. They planned to split the cost of gas for the trip, as was their custom. D purchased a lottery ticket with three quick pick numbers at the hotel gift shop, and then he returned to the lounge to tell everyone. P claims D said, 'Go buy three lottery tickets, and we'll split.' D claims he said he felt 'pretty lucky' and suggested to P, 'Why don't you go buy some,' not mentioning any split. P testified he walked to the gift stand and bought three lottery tickets. It is undisputed that when P returned, he said nothing about the number of tickets he had purchased, and he did not show anyone any lottery tickets. D discovered that one of his lottery ticket numbers was a winner of $1.6 million Canadian ($ 1.2 million U.S.). Ds and Ps had been friends for 40 years, and D frequently bought lottery tickets, but the parties never pooled their funds to purchase lottery tickets. They did have a custom of pooling their money before buying pull tabs, and they would open their pull tabs together and split any proceeds immediately. They also had a custom of splitting the cost of drinks. On this occasion, D paid for all Ps' drinks and meals. Ds celebrated and arranged for safekeeping the ticket in the hotel safe and later in a safety deposit box. Ps did not take part in these arrangements. On the ride back to Fargo, there was no mention of splitting the lottery. D told P there would be no equal sharing of the winnings, and but P thought D would share the winnings. D sent each of Ps $ 2,500 as a gesture of friendship. P expected D to buy him a motor home, and so their friendship ended. P sued D. D moved for summary judgment. The court granted it; even if the alleged contract existed, such an agreement would be contrary to North Dakota's public policy against gambling. Ps appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co