Pearsall and Alexander drove to a liquor store to purchase lottery tickets. Pearsall went into the store alone, and when he came out, and in reference to the tickets asked Alexander, “ Are you in on it?” Alexander said, “ Yes.” When Pearsall asked Alexander for his half of the purchase price of the tickets, Alexander replied that he had no money. When they reached Alexander’s home, Alexander, expressing his anxiety that Pearsall might lose the tickets, demanded that Pearsall produce them, snatched them from Pearsall’s hand, and “ scratched” them, only to find that both were worthless.
At about 8: 00 p. m. that same evening, Alexander, who apparently had come by some funds of his own, returned to the liquor store and bought two more tickets and returned home. This time Pearsall, who had been offended by Alexander’s conduct earlier in taking both tickets, snatched the two tickets from Alexander and announced that he would be the one to “ scratch” them. He changed his mind however and gave over one of the tickets to Alexander. Each man then “ scratched” one of the tickets.
Pearsall’s ticket proved worthless; Alexander’s was a $ 20,000 winner. Subsequently, Alexander cashed in the ticket and received the winnings; but when Pearsall asked for his share, Alexander refused to give Pearsall anything. Pearsall brought suit against Alexander claiming breach of an agreement to share the proceeds of the winning ticket. Alexander denied that there was any agreement to share the winnings. Pearsall, however, stated that his lawsuit was not about suing for money based on gambling, but rather on an agreement entered into to share the winnings of a jointly purchased lottery ticket. Each man gave as consideration for the agreement his promise to share the proceeds of the winnings. Should Pearsall win this case?