Mystery $560 million Powerball winner can remain a mystery, judge rules

John Bacon | USA TODAY

A mystery New Hampshire woman who won a $560 million Powerball prize in January can remain anonymous, a judge ruled Monday.

Judge Charles Temple said disclosing the woman's name would be an invasion of privacy, but her hometown can be made public by the state Lottery Commission. The woman's lawyer, William Shaheen, said she is from Merrimack, 30 miles south of Concord.

Thus the woman who has been dubbed "Jane Doe" can keep the pseudonym, at least for now. Lawyers for the state did not immediately announce whether they would appeal Temple's ruling.

"Disclosure of Ms. Doe’s name would constitute an invasion of privacy," Temple wrote. "This personal information is exempt from disclosure under the Right-to-Know law."

Shaheen collected her $352 million check last week while continuing the legal battle to keep her identity secret. The woman won the Powerball drawing Jan. 6 after buying the ticket at Reeds Ferry Market, a convenience store in Merrimack.

State law requires release of a winner's name and hometown. The state Attorney General's Office had argued that the woman's identity must be revealed because she signed her name on the back of the ticket.

More: Mystery $559.7M Powerball winner claims her prize

More: These lucky charities got cash from mystery $560M Powerball winner

Release of winners' names provides transparency and assures the public that they aren't associated with the lottery, the office said.

Shaheen's law firm claimed in a lawsuit filed in January that by winning she joined a small demographic of jackpot winners that "has historically been victimized by the unscrupulous." The firm said she made a "huge mistake" when she signed her real name on the back of the ticket before contacting them.

The woman could have remained anonymous had she established a trust, then had a trustee sign the ticket, the lawyers argued.

"Although the Commission dismissed this harassment as trivial and or speculative, for the court to do so would require it to ignore the significant media attention this case has received, the numerous documents of bad experiences of other lottery winners, as well as the bevy of unsolicited emails, phone calls and in-person visits already directed at Ms. Doe through her attorneys," Temple wrote.