Lawyer lands winning in-house lottery job

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
In-House Counsel

When Andrew Klinger decided to take a job as corporate counsel for a state agency, he was essentially playing the odds like someone buying a lottery ticket.

That was less than a year after being admitted to practice of law in Indiana, and it led to his eventually taking an in-house counsel position at the Hoosier Lottery, where he is now the top attorney.

“For someone who always thought I’d be a real estate attorney, how I got into gaming is still kind of a mystery to me,” said the 40-year old lawyer who’s been general counsel for the Hoosier Lottery since 2008, after four years working as a deputy general counsel at the Indiana Gaming Commission. “Some things are just lucky draws.”

Although Klinger had been interested for some time in pursing a legal career, he began working in economic development immediately after earning his undergraduate degree. The Fort Wayne native worked for several years in his hometown before moving to the Indiana Economic Development Commission and eventually deciding he was ready to start law school in 2001.

klinger Indianapolis attorney Andrew Klinger has served as general counsel for the Hoosier Lottery since 2008. (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

“I was always interested in pre-law, but sat back and thought I didn’t want to go straight in and didn’t know what I’d go into with a law degree. So, I went into real estate and economic development work and got a practical sense of what I’d do as an attorney with a degree,” Klinger said.

He graduated from Indiana University School of Law – Indianapolis in 2004, and worked briefly as a contract attorney with an employment law attorney in Carmel. But before he agreed to start as an associate there, a new opportunity came his way.

“In the spring 2005, the Gaming Commission called out of the blue. I just kind of fell into this,” he said. “I took the chance.”

After a few years there as a deputy general counsel, Klinger said he was ready for the next step and found that at the Hoosier Lottery. There, he became the general counsel. This position is different in that he had several staff attorneys to work with at the Gaming Commission, while he’s the only attorney at the Lottery. That prior position was more regulatory, dealing with private casinos and their licenses, while this is a semi-government agency tasked with maximizing revenues through sales of lottery tickets.

Most of his daily duties include contract review and dealing with vendors and licensing issues, all through the lens of a government agency that must respect open meetings and access laws.

A self-sufficient quasi-public agency that isn’t connected to the state budget, the Hoosier Lottery raises its own revenue and pays its expenses from that. Klinger said about $791 million came in last year, with major expenses paid out for prizes and commissions to retailers and a small percentage on administrative costs. The rest goes back to the state – most recently the Hoosier Lottery put about $190 million into the budget to pay for teacher and public safety pensions and reduce state excise tax. Klinger said the Hoosier Lottery is working on spreading the word about the fiscal value it brings to the state, motivating people to buy tickets.

Litigation is a minimal part of his job, though he does oversee that as general counsel. Most of the legal claims go through the administrative procedures first and typically end up before an administrative law judge, and Klinger said he handles those cases personally.

“In large part, I shield the marketing and sales folk from the political aspect so they can focus on the sales tasks,” he said.

When Klinger started the job, he said the Hoosier Lottery had a large litigation docket that he spent most of his time focusing on. Now, only one lawsuit remains outstanding for the agency – a class-action lawsuit in Marion Superior Court involving two plaintiffs who sued the state lottery for thousands of dollars after they lost playing the Cash Blast game in 2005 and 2006 and claimed the lottery misstated the number and amount of prizes available. The men claimed they were misled by advertising that made the odds of winning seem greater than they were, and last year the Indiana Court of Appeals determined that suit can move forward at trial.

Despite it being such a small aspect of his work as general counsel, Klinger said it’s the litigation and administrative court claims he finds the most interesting. But he also enjoys handling the issues that take him back to his pre-law days, such as real estate and economic development.

The Hoosier Lottery recently moved into a new headquarters on North Meridian Street in Indianapolis and Klinger is proud of his work negotiating and finalizing that 10-year lease.

“That was a game changer for us, and really kept things interesting and took me back to those early days,” he said. “Some people think that working with the lottery is all fun and games… and it’s not, it really is a lot of work.”

While Klinger isn’t allowed to play the Hoosier Lottery, he usually tries to buy a lottery ticket out of state whenever he travels. Although he hasn’t won a jackpot to date, he considers himself lucky to have won the chance to be working where he is.

“In a corporate environment, you’re right there in the middle of everything,” he said. “This is always interesting and different, with something new coming your way, a lot different than what I understand firm life to be like. I’m glad this ticket came my way.”•


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I think the cops are doing a great job locking up criminals. The Murder rates in the inner cities are skyrocketing and you think that too any people are being incarcerated. Maybe we need to lock up more of them. We have the ACLU, BLM, NAACP, Civil right Division of the DOJ, the innocent Project etc. We have court system with an appeal process that can go on for years, with attorneys supplied by the government. I'm confused as to how that translates into the idea that the defendants are not being represented properly. Maybe the attorneys need to do more Pro-Bono work

  2. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  3. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  4. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  5. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.