A woman has reportedly claimed she is entitled to half of her former husband's $40 million (£29.8 million) lottery winnings, arguing that her support during their seven-year marriage should give her a share of the prize. An unverified courtroom video circulating online appears to show the dispute, with the couple's divorce reportedly finalised just hours before the man purchased the winning ticket.
The footage, which went viral on X and YouTube, shows the couple's divorce was finalised at 9 am on 7 October. Later that afternoon, the husband, identified as Matthew Taylor, bought a six-pack of beer and then purchased a lottery ticket on impulse.
'I was going to go home, watch the game, just kind of relax a little bit. And on a whim, as I was paying, I decided to buy a lottery ticket,' he told the judge.'And so, I bought a lottery ticket, something I almost never do. And that's when I won the money.'
The ticket reportedly secured a $40 million (£29.8 million) prize, leading his former wife to seek $20 million (£14.9 million). She claimed he bought the ticket with funds from their shared account and that it should be considered marital property.
She explained to the judge: 'I supported this man for seven years, following him everywhere he goes so he can chase his dreams. And I gave up on my career and my life to support him.'
She divorced her husband at 9 AM. At 12:30 PM, he bought a lottery ticket that won $40,000,000.
— Gunther (@GuntherWrite) November 2, 2026
In a staged Southern Justice courtroom episode, Diana Taylor sues her ex-husband Mark for half the prize.
She tells the judge the ticket was bought with money from their shared… pic.twitter.com/r4zrrWB3cR
Winning Numbers Linked to Marriage
The former wife also argued that the six winning numbers–2, 7, 14, 21, 28, and 39–corresponded to milestones in their relationship. She linked them to their wedding date, proposal, anniversary, their dog's birthday, first date, and the 39 cities they reportedly moved to during his career pursuits.
'Those numbers you see on the lottery tickets is not coincidence. It's our mutual history, and without me, without us, he would not have won it,' she argued.
However, her former husband stated that he did not personally select the numbers. 'I did a quick pick. I didn't even pick the numbers, the computer picked them for me. I've no idea if all the dates are even correct,' he said.
He also disputed her account of their marriage. He stated that she had never worked during their relationship and filed for divorce after most of his savings were depleted.
'The Law Is the Law'
The husband presented a receipt in the video showing the ticket was purchased at 12:30 pm, three and a half hours after the divorce was finalised. The judge subsequently challenged the former wife's argument, stating, 'You should have hung in there till 12:00 that afternoon.'
Ultimately, the judge ruled the winnings belonged to the husband, as the divorce had already been finalised. 'The law is the law and how much no matter how much sympathy I have for you, I can't rule any other way,' she told the former wife.
The husband also filed a $2,500 (£1,864) counterclaim to recover personal expenses, including legal consultations. However, the judge rejected his request. The case and video's authenticity remain unverified but highlights understanding of post-divorce financial obligations and asset division.
Man Still Pays Alimony After Mega Millions Jackpot
Separately, a New Jersey resident Michael Weirsky made headlines after winning a $273 million (£203 million) Mega Millions jackpot in 2019. His win came after a difficult divorce and nearly 18 months of unemployment.
He almost missed out on the fortune after leaving his ticket at a QuickCheck store. A stranger returned it, allowing him to claim the prize.
His sudden wealth led to an unusual financial arrangement with his ex-wife, Eileen Murray. She was the primary breadwinner during their 15-year marriage. Following their divorce, Weirsky continued to receive five years of alimony from her, despite his new multimillionaire status.
Murray noted the payments were now insignificant compared to his fortune, but stressed she would not seek his winnings, stating, 'I'm not going after anything. I have morals'.
