Divorced mother Patricia Daly, an Offaly native, won an $8 million lump sum in the New York lottery last January and planned a new life for her and her kids .
Not so fast said Jamie Eisel her ex-husband, on his third marriage, who had left her and her three kids to fend for themselves a year earlier. He is now in a new relationship.
He has taken a restraining order out stopping her spending any of the money and the case will go to court on September 13th.
Daly, 40, offered him $1 million but he turned it down according to the Evening Herald. She took the lump sum of $8 million from the $21.5 million win
_____________
Read More:
Offaly woman scoops New York lottery- SEE VIDEO
Luck of the Irish as woman wins $21 million N.Y. lottery
Husband of Irish NY lottery winner Patricia Eisel misses out
______________
His lawyers will argue he is entitled to half the winnings because they were still married at the time of the win last December.
"There will be no settlement now," said her lawyer Dorothy Gong told the Evening Herald. "He was offered $1m and no obligation for child support or college costs for the kids."
The case may last up to 12 months and Daly may well end up losing say experts.
"She's going to be splitting that money. I think it's a matter of how much," according to legal expert Marilyn Chinitz.
Daly moved to America in 1995 and was working long hours as a waitress at the Saloon Bar in Long Beach and as a child minder when she won the money. At the time she said her needs were simple.
"I will buy a home, not a house, in New York. Something very comfortable with a big, fenced-in yard that the boys can run around in.
"I know they'll be thrilled when I tell them we'll also buy a dog to run around the yard with them."
Friends say she was shattered when she and her husband Jamie Eisel split last year,
Jamie Eisel, an ironworker and part-time bartender, continued to live near his 40-year-old wife and children in Long Beach, New York, but then moved on to a new romance.
She only won the jackpot because her flight home to Ireland had been canceled due to the severe weather before Christmas, so she was in New York to buy the lottery ticket that won her $21,500,000.
About the difference her new found fortune will make to her life, she told the Daily Mail: "I have been in America since ’95. I babysat at first and right now I live in Long Beach. I waitress and bar-tend and mind kids."
"It’s a struggle to keep it all together but it’s good – the bar’s good where I work. But this is going to make it a lot better."
She has sworn "to keep life normal, no big purchases’. She even said she’d keep working ‘for a while."
30 Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Switch to the desktop site to post a comment.enjsmom | Sep 23, 2011, 07:33 PM EDT
Ladies and Gentleman-he is not living w/ the girlfriend..no divorce proceedings in the near future...he keeps asking for divorce when this bs is over and she still says NO!!!! As for you SeamusMor you are obviously a comlete and utter moron...and how embarrasing that you did that in a public forum such as this. The public now knows how shallow and pathetic you are...and even moreso b/c he IS NOT JEWISH!
timbobdennehy | Sep 04, 2011, 07:31 PM EDT
my question is did they have a legal marriage,not a legit divorce. she offered in my words renumeration,he declined greedy,selfish bastard,pay a hitman $5.done. if he is entitle,pay him a wage not a lump sum,that way it wont be wasted,plus arguing the fact if any of the parents die,is their a will for the children,the children are also their 50/50 case closed.trust fund.
derrymarch | Sep 04, 2011, 03:22 PM EDT
Her ex-husband is a creep! He makes me vomit!
sirpeter | Sep 03, 2011, 04:14 PM EDT
There is no such thing as common law marriage in Ireland.England abolished clandestine or common-law marriages in the Marriage Act 1753,requiring marriages to be performed by a priest of the Church of England unless the participants in the marriage were Jews or Quakers.The Act applied to Wales, and to Ireland after the Act of Union 1800,
sirpeter | Sep 03, 2011, 04:03 PM EDT
@Sparklet.I was never divorced,but I presume you have to sign divorce papers or a judge gives a ruling.I guess been in the process of divorce is not the same thing as been divorced.Until it's all done and dusted as they say.
JOLIEJO | Sep 03, 2011, 01:30 PM EDT
If this goes to court or is dragged out for years only the lawyers will profit. If they were married at the time, he probably does have a claim on the money. I’d give him the money and save myself the horrible mental anguish it will cause, trying to fight it out in court for years. If she was fugal, [which statistics points out that most Lotto inners aren’t an are broke in five years after winning] she could live very well on 4 million. I don’t know all the facts in the case, but just because she is Irish doesn’t necessarily nominate her for sainthood. What people claim and the truth of the matter are often two different things.
Trealach | Sep 03, 2011, 12:32 PM EDT
He says that he has a court injunction to stop her from "spending it". In that case, she can put the entire amount into Trust for her children, return home to Ireland and then live off the interest, and if he thinks the courts here will be in any rush to sort all that out - he'll be an old age pensioner - rofl.
Sparklet | Sep 03, 2011, 12:27 PM EDT
Everyone who is so adamant that she would do the same thing, should rein in a bit. You don't know the woman, and there's no guarantee that she would do that, any more than there's a guarantee that every man would do it. I know some women who might want something for their children, but wouldn't demean themselves to ask for anything more than they're entitled to.
Oldwildrover | Sep 03, 2011, 12:17 PM EDT
If he won the money, you know very well she would do the same thing.....and would win....that's guaranteed. So what's fair is fair.
Pittsburghkid | Sep 03, 2011, 11:45 AM EDT
She is Separated not Divorced, which means that she is legally married in the eyes of American Law. Concerning her husbands girlfriend, it is not relevant. Now if he is living Common Law, then she can charge him with bigammy. He can go to jail for that. If she is still legally married to him then he gets half. The fact that he is on his third marriage is not relivent in American Law.
marciejm | Sep 03, 2011, 11:16 AM EDT
I agree Sparklet - SeamusMor's very first comment about giving Eisel giving the money to his synagogue was hateful and anti-semitic and completely uncalled for. I reported it as abuse immediately, but it was not removed. Shame on you SeamusMor and double SHAME ON YOU Irish Central. I'm taking you off my mailing list.
Jamcelt | Sep 03, 2011, 11:05 AM EDT
I do not know too much about her situation, but one thing we can be sure of, if the man had won the money, she would be all over him like a swarm of bees....
Sparklet | Sep 03, 2011, 10:33 AM EDT
Sirpeter, if divorce proceedings have started, how can the law decide that you're still married? There should be an element of common sense applied, and the law needs changing if it decrees that a divorcing couple are still married.
macalister | Sep 02, 2011, 10:48 PM EDT
This Romeo left her to fend for herself,and now thinks he's "entitled" to half!In your dreams Mr.He should have accepted her generous offer,and been happy.
Starlet | Sep 02, 2011, 09:33 PM EDT
Like the previous article in this Enewsletter ("Separated husband of Irish NY Lottery winner to sue for share"), there is always some non-relevant, irreverent anti-semitic barb. I'm so happy for Patricia Daley Eisel and she certainly has enough to split whether or not Jamie deserves it or not. Afterall, she could make it as a Long Island waitress. In fact, I pity his current flame or any other person with him now or in the future. Why do some readers call her a "ho?" It doesn't say she's responsible for the breakup. Once again, good luck to this lady and I hope she spends it wisely.
Stiofain | Sep 02, 2011, 07:33 PM EDT
It should be obvious, with no need of a court, the man deserves nothing but the disdain of the community. And there no need for anti-semitic remarks either, SeamusMor!
Bermudagirl | Sep 02, 2011, 06:37 PM EDT
This is why you NEVER go public with a lottery win...although as they had children he may have found out anyway. This is disgusting. He shouldn't get a dime from her!
naraic123 | Sep 02, 2011, 05:26 PM EDT
I'm with you SeamusMor. Such a nice lady having to deal with a pig like this.
sirpeter | Sep 02, 2011, 02:45 PM EDT
If they were married at the time of the win then he is entitled to half.A marriage contract is like a partnership contract in business where all profits and losses are shared equally.The rest is irrelevant.I'd be very surprised if he didn't get half or at least 3 million.The law is not about justice.It's about law.
Sparklet | Sep 02, 2011, 02:23 PM EDT
If the divorce was already in motion, then it should be hers, not his. Marriage should be considered over from the moment legal proceedings are started.
Reilleyfam | Sep 02, 2011, 01:54 PM EDT
Without a legal document of separation - likely not done until the legal divorce which had not happened yet when she won - he gets half. However, with all the hassle and legal/atty fees he'll pay he'd been smarter to take the 1 million and walk away hassle-free.
Parents | Sep 02, 2011, 12:46 PM EDT
I hope he does not get a cent... was there no separation agreement? How about child support for the past yr? How about this slimeball gets nothing but a huge lawyer bill. Just when something good happens the slimeball is back - disgusting.
joan1954 | Sep 02, 2011, 12:18 PM EDT
I don't know if NY is a community property state like Texas is but I would suspect that it is and if they weren't divorced at the time of the win then he is still entitled to half. However a smart attorney could look at his "half" even if it is still hers as back child support and alimony as I believe new york is an alimony state. Something to think about?
Trealach | Sep 02, 2011, 11:58 AM EDT
Just based on the 'facts' reported here, he hasn't got any claim to any of the money. (1) "Not so fast said Jamie Eisel her ex-husband, on his third marriage, who had left her and her three kids to fend for themselves a year earlier." Presumably he was then divorced from her - it then goes on to say "He is now in a new relationship." Does that mean he's on to wife number 4? I'd nearly give the $1million to a hit man - lol
feliciamaisey | Sep 02, 2011, 10:54 AM EDT
If he had not been living in the home at the time of the purchase and subsequent win, and if they were living as separate people with intent to divorce then he should not be provisioned as co-owner to the win.It was generous and clear that she had offered a milllion and and would not come after him for support or education money for the children, so it appears that he wil neot give anything away, but rather keep it i all if he can get it. What is unclear is why he thinks he is i entitled and why he would take money away that would only f be tot he betterment of his own children--sounds like he is a bit greedy and looking to yank the happy out of the win for his ex-wife.
mollymguire | Sep 02, 2011, 10:46 AM EDT
Did she not have a legal separation? I surely hope the lout doesn't get half, not to spend on the ho he's with. I just don't understand not having a legal separation.
Searlit | Sep 02, 2011, 10:43 AM EDT
Nobody try to tell me that the courts are fairer to women.
JBRAFTREE | Sep 02, 2011, 10:42 AM EDT
He should've taken the Million offered him and said to hell with it. How greedy can some people be.!!!!
cillowen | Sep 02, 2011, 10:18 AM EDT
'pears that he's big on acquiring things like a bee from flower to flower - pound of flesh fellow
SeamusMor | Sep 02, 2011, 10:07 AM EDT
Mr. Eisel might have good intentions, perhaps he is planning to give it all away to charity, or even to his synagogue!