Maine's top lottery victor is attempting to withdraw his legal action against a former partner, whom he asserts disclosed his $1.35 billion winnings to his parents after a judge determined he could not keep his identity confidential.

The individual, referred to in legal documents as “John Doe,” filed a lawsuit in November 2023 against the mother of his child, claiming she breached a confidentiality agreement meant to safeguard his identity by telling his father and stepmother about the lottery win.

$100K Per Breach

The plaintiff sought a court order preventing his ex, who is identified as “Sara Smith,” from revealing any additional details about the jackpot.

He also requested the federal court to compel Smith to disclose the identities of all individuals she had informed and demanded at least $100,000 in compensatory damages for each unauthorized revelation.

As stated in the lawsuit, the purpose of the NDA was to ensure the “safety and security” of Doe, Smith, and their child, while minimizing the “irreparable damage” that could follow if the public or media became aware of their identities and home location.

Smith's legal team refuted the claim that their client breached the agreement, contending that the lawsuit was an attempt to exert pressure on her during an ongoing custody dispute. In a court submission, Smith claimed that Doe engaged a private security team that tracked her and their daughter every day.

The Dilemma

Doe’s request to dismiss the lawsuit came concurrently with the 1st U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirming an April 2025 decision that rejected his motion for a private trial to shield his identity.

The appellate judges concurred with the ruling of the lower court judge that a private trial would significantly contradict the “historic concept of what courts represent in this nation. ”

In the dismissal motion, Doe’s lawyers conceded that their client encountered an inescapable dilemma.

“… [E]ven if plaintiff were to win on his claims, his identity and confidential information would be revealed to the media and public, which is exactly what he brought suit to avoid,” they wrote.

Smith's lawyer, Peter Brann, informed the Portland Press Herald on Wednesday, September 16, that he intends to challenge the motion to dismiss as it was submitted "without prejudice. "

“Which means that they can turn around and file another baseless lawsuit against the defendant tomorrow,” Brann said. “And that, I do not want. … It should never have been filed to begin with.”

As the legal conflict comes to an end, the case highlights how a historically high prize transformed a personal family quarrel into a prolonged federal court battle—and ultimately deprived the victor of the anonymity he aimed to maintain.