Circle K says a winning “The Pick” ticket was printed, set aside and later bought after the drawing.
SCOTTSDALE, AZ — An Arizona judge will decide who legally owns a $12.8 million lottery ticket after Circle K sued one of its store managers, saying the winning ticket was printed during a customer’s purchase but was left behind and never properly sold.
The lawsuit, filed in Maricopa County Superior Court, asks the court to rule on whether the ticket was validly sold and who is entitled to claim the prize. The Arizona Lottery is also named in the case, and the jackpot remains unclaimed while the dispute plays out. The outcome could test how Arizona’s lottery rules apply when tickets are printed but a customer does not pay for all of them.
The case traces back to the night of Nov. 24, 2025, at a Circle K near 56th Street and Bell Road in Scottsdale, according to the company’s court complaint. A customer came in to buy multiple tickets for “The Pick,” an Arizona Lottery game in which players match six numbers. Circle K says an employee printed $85 worth of $1 tickets, but the customer paid for only $60 worth before leaving. The complaint says the remaining 25 tickets stayed at the store and were not sold to anyone else. Later that night, the Arizona Lottery drew the winning numbers — 3, 13, 14, 15, 19 and 26 — and one of the unsold tickets matched all six numbers, making it a $12.8 million winner.
Circle K alleges that the next day, store manager Robert Gawlitza realized one of the leftover tickets had hit the jackpot. The company says Gawlitza then clocked out, took off his uniform and had another employee ring up the remaining tickets, including the winning one, for $10. The lawsuit says he signed the back of the ticket after the purchase. Word of the transaction reached company leaders, and Circle K says it directed that the winning ticket be kept at corporate offices while the legal questions get settled. Circle K’s attorneys declined to comment publicly, and Gawlitza did not respond to requests for comment.
At the center of the dispute is a basic question: when a ticket prints but a customer does not buy it, who owns it? Circle K points to Arizona’s administrative rules for lottery retailers. State Rep. Jeff Weninger, a Republican from Chandler who chairs the House Commerce Committee, said the rules address situations where a store “overprints” tickets during a transaction. “It is in the administrative rules that basically says if they overprint that the retailer owns the tickets,” Weninger said. Circle K argues the rule matters here because the customer did not pay for every printed ticket, leaving some behind. Still, Circle K is asking a judge to decide whether the ticket was ever validly sold and who lawfully owns it, a move that signals the company sees legal risk in simply claiming the prize for itself.
The Arizona Lottery has acknowledged the lawsuit and said the situation appears unusual. “This is a unique situation, and we are not aware of any prior litigation of this sort involving the Arizona Lottery,” a lottery spokesperson said in a statement. The lottery has not announced a public position on who should receive the money, and the court filing seeks guidance before any payout happens. The case also raises practical issues for lottery operations: retailers print tickets quickly, customers often buy several at once, and stores sometimes end up with printed tickets that do not go out the door in a paid transaction.
The timeline matters because Arizona lottery prizes must be claimed within a set period. The deadline to claim this ticket is 180 days from the drawing, which falls on May 23, 2026. That clock creates pressure for a clear ruling, even if the court fight lasts beyond the spring. If no one claims the prize by the deadline, the jackpot could expire under lottery rules, leaving a dispute without a payout. For now, the ticket remains in limbo while the court decides whether the ticket belongs to Circle K as the retailer, to Gawlitza as the person who later bought and signed it, or to someone else based on how the law treats an incomplete purchase.
The lawsuit also highlights unanswered questions that could become key in court. The filing describes a set of printed tickets that were left behind and later sold, but it does not publicly identify the original customer who requested the tickets. It is also not clear whether surveillance video, register records or internal store documents will show exactly what was printed, what was paid for and how the leftover tickets were handled overnight. The complaint says the unused tickets were set aside and not offered for sale to other customers, a detail that could matter if the court examines whether the store treated them as its own property from the start.
The dispute has drawn attention at the state Capitol because it sits at the intersection of business policy, consumer transactions and lottery regulation. Weninger said lawmakers could look at whether the state should spell out the rule more clearly in law after the court resolves this case. “It might be something after the court case is played out that we look at and say, OK, do we need this in actual law if a situation like this happens?” he said. Any change would likely come later, but the case is already being watched as a test of how Arizona handles high-dollar prizes tied to disputed ownership.
For Circle K, the legal filing frames the dispute as more than a workplace issue. The company is asking for a declaration from the court on ownership and entitlement, which could help shield it from competing claims. For Gawlitza, the allegations focus on the moment he learned the ticket was a winner and then bought it. That sequence could influence how a judge views the fairness of the purchase, even if the case turns mainly on written rules. The filing does not list any criminal charges, and the dispute is playing out as a civil case over who gets the money.
The case is also an unusual look at what happens after a jackpot hit but before any money changes hands. Lottery winners typically claim prizes with signed tickets and receipts, and retailers usually play no role once a ticket is sold. Here, Circle K says the ticket never made it through a complete sale before the drawing, and it wants the court to say whether a ticket like that can be treated as retailer property. The Arizona Lottery, meanwhile, sits in the middle, responsible for paying a valid claim but also tasked with following court orders and its own rules. The lawsuit’s inclusion of the lottery as a defendant underscores that any payout will likely depend on a judge’s guidance.
Outside the courtroom, the scene at the center of the case is an ordinary corner convenience store that became the focus of a multimillion-dollar fight overnight. The disputed ticket came from a routine transaction for a daily numbers game, not a special event drawing, and the alleged mistake involved a stack of low-cost tickets. That contrast — a $1 ticket tied to an eight-figure prize — has helped fuel interest in how the dispute will be resolved and whether it will change how stores handle leftover printed tickets. The complaint says the prize money is $12.8 million in cash, an amount large enough to draw intense scrutiny to every step in the transaction record.
The court has not announced a final ruling, and it is not clear when a judge will set a schedule for next filings or hearings. The key milestone on the calendar is May 23, 2026, the claim deadline for the ticket, which could force faster decisions about who can present a valid claim for the jackpot.
Author note: Last updated Feb. 23, 2026.