SYDNEY, N.S. — A Cape Breton judge has handed a big victory to a contest winner trying to keep a $100,000 prize despite an alleged agreement to split it with four other finalists.
Darin Seymour won the cash in a car dealership contest on Jan. 6, but the other contestants claim there was a verbal agreement to split the winnings, with each finalist receiving $20,000.
His wife, Kimberly Seymour, attended the draw on behalf of her husband. Darin Seymour acknowledges that his wife agreed to split the money before the draw was made, but says that she felt pressured to do so.
Darin, who had to work at the time of the draw, says he would never have agreed to give away 80 per cent of his winnings. He adds that his wife suffers from anxiety and is "very shy and uncomfortable in social situations with strangers.''
In a ruling Wednesday, Justice Frank Edwards says he did not have to decide whether Kimberly was coerced into the deal, as the couple claims.
Edwards says Darin Seymour's wife did not have authority to make the deal on his behalf.
"The fact is that Darin won, he never agreed to share his prize, and he never authorized his wife to make such an agreement," the judge ruled.
Although his ruling dealt only with temporary custody of the prize money while the issue was litigated, the Nova Scotia Supreme Court judge told the other finalists they should abandon any claim.
"The plaintiffs have no chance of convincing a court that Darin Seymour is contractually bound to share his win," said the judge. "The plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate there is a serious question to be tried."
He warned them they would likely otherwise be forced to pay the Seymours' legal bill, and pointed out: "Litigation is very expensive."
He ordered them to pay $1,200 costs to the Seymours.
The night before the draw, the Seymours had discussed renovating their home and taking their 12-year-old daughter to Florida if they were to win.
Kimberly Seymour had said she has been emotionally distraught and on stress leave since the ordeal, as people had started confronting her at her workplace and at her home.
"I have been worried and stressed that my inability to stand up to people and disagree with them has caused us to be in this situation and took the joy out of winning the lottery from us and our family,'' she said in an affidavit.
She said she felt intimidated by fellow finalist Priscilla Gould.
"I did not feel like I had any choice than to agree with Ms. Gould's proposal,'' said Seymour in the affidavit, filed in Sydney, N.S. "I was fearful to oppose her in any way, among strangers and under the scrutiny of other people.''
Rita MacMullin, another plaintiffs, said she doesn't believe any pressure was put on Kimberly Seymour.
"After the draw, Ms. Seymour stated that she would split the grand prize equally among the five finalists,'' said MacMullin in an affidavit. "Ms. Seymour told us that once she got the cheque ... she would get it cashed and then she would call us all to go to her house and collect our share of the money.''
Another plaintiff, Mathew Standing, said Kimberly Seymour stated that her "word was good,'' and that he heard her mention the agreement many times.
But, the judge said Wednesday, no one ever checked with the actual winner, Darin Seymour.
"The agreement was spawned in a highly charged atmosphere. It is understandable that the crucial issue of Darin's input simply got overlooked," the judge said. "There was no evidence that anyone even asked Kim whether she was sure her husband would go along with the deal."
