Facts of Palese v. Delaware State Lottery Office Essay

Facts of Palese v. Delaware State draftsmanship placement - Essay ExamplePalese contacted the Lottery Office in writing, describing his predicament and was directed to wait for one year so that his claim could be reviewed.11 months later, Palese read in the dailies that the Lottery Office had transferred his unclaimed lottery jackpot to the States General Fund. Palese contacted the Lottery Office again and was told to explain how he had purchased the lottery and lost the tickets, much to Paleses compliance. Even after hearing that Palese still had the play slip, the Lottery Office held that he was to be denied his claim since he could not produce his actual amiable ticket. Palese took the matter to the court for litigation while the Lottery Office equally rushed to dismiss Paleses claim on the account that Palese could not sufficiently state his claim for which the relief was to be granted.In the case Palese v. Delaware State Lottery Office, 1546-N, as the plaintiff, Palese accuse s the Lottery Office of unjust enrichment since it had taken his rightfully owned prize to the States General Fund. In this light, he wants the prize he had won to be accorded him.Whether or not the rules of the Lottery Act such as Lottery canon 18 and 19 should be amended to allow the Lottery Act to capture unforeseeable circumstances such as inadvertent destruction or loss of the winning ticket. The Court of Chancery of Delaware heard from both the plaintiff and the respondent and referred to the directives in the Lottery Act, the Lottery Regulation 18 and 19 to arrive at its verdict.