The
6/28/2011, 04:21 PM
Lottery winner to fight for seized 'scratch' (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/brooklyn/lottery_winner_to_fight_for_seized_ZVLpK5ICqwJVmIm 1P2kXvM)
A Brooklyn man whose lottery winnings were seized because he'd been on public assistance has won the right to fight for the return of his prize money.
When Walter Carver won $10,000 in 2007, the state Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance notified him it was taking half to repay the money he had received from 1997 to 2000.
"I was in shock," said Carver, who scored big on a $2 Cashword scratch-off. "I was never told there was a lien against me. I was off it [public assistance] for seven years."
In order to collect benefits, Carver had to work 35 hours a week in the Work Experience Program, first in the mailroom at Coney Island Hospital and later cleaning up at the Staten Island Ferry Terminal in Manhattan.
He sued the state, claiming that the repayment would mean he had been forced to work for well below the minimum wage.
A Supreme Court judge ruled against him, but Carver, 65, appealed and the case was sent back to the lower court.
A Brooklyn man whose lottery winnings were seized because he'd been on public assistance has won the right to fight for the return of his prize money.
When Walter Carver won $10,000 in 2007, the state Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance notified him it was taking half to repay the money he had received from 1997 to 2000.
"I was in shock," said Carver, who scored big on a $2 Cashword scratch-off. "I was never told there was a lien against me. I was off it [public assistance] for seven years."
In order to collect benefits, Carver had to work 35 hours a week in the Work Experience Program, first in the mailroom at Coney Island Hospital and later cleaning up at the Staten Island Ferry Terminal in Manhattan.
He sued the state, claiming that the repayment would mean he had been forced to work for well below the minimum wage.
A Supreme Court judge ruled against him, but Carver, 65, appealed and the case was sent back to the lower court.