Many rules are made through the noble and respected method of deliberation and vote by legislative bodies. Just like a bill becoming a law in School House Rock. For better or worse, more and more rules are now being created by Judicial courts of last resort. The time worn question of “Should Student athletes get paid?’ was answered with a surprising and resounding “Why the hell not?” about three years ago and we are still seeing its consequences unfold. National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston, 594 U.S. ___ (2021)

Another theme animating law is infancy as a relevant status.  Alston, which foisted NIL on collegiate athletics would further highlight this intersection.

As background, timeline and general outline: Shilo Sanders filed for bankruptcy in December of 2023. He played at South Carolina, 2019 to 2020, at Jackson State 2021to 2022,  and Colorado 2023 to present. College students started to receive NIL money in 2021. The assault was allegedly committed in 2015, when Shilo Sanders was fifteen years old. Plaintiff, John Darjean’s lawsuit filed in 2016. John Darjean was awarded an $11.89 million default judgment.

Each state determines the imputed liability of parents with regards to its children This level of liability may be less equitable than expected by the man on the street, but here is not the time or place to go into this.

However, in this case, the nexus of the alleged tortious conduct of the fifteen-year old Shilo Sanders, and the actions and status of his father are more interweaved than might be expected at first glance. The plaintiff was an employee of the school at which father Deion was the CEO. And in the alleged facts, it was Deion, who may have actually told John Darjean to take the phone from his son.

Sanders has had NIL opportunities during his time in Colorado. At the recent bankruptcy hearing, Judge Romero ruled that Darjean’s claims about Sanders’ deletion of social media posts and the failure to provide financial records could support Darjean’s case. This prompted the judge to deny Sanders’ attempt to dismiss the complaint.

Sanders’ legal troubles stem from an $11.89 million judgment, from an incident wherein This debt stems from an incident in 2015 when Shilo was accused of inflicting injuries on Darjean, leading to a lawsuit that resulted in a default judgment against Sanders in 2022. Sanders, however, did not appear at the trial to defend himself, which led to the default judgment in Darjean’s favor.  

The most recent development of this case is Shilo Sander’s effort to dismiss John Darjean’s claim to collect on his judgment. effort to dismiss Shilo Sander’s bankruptcy petition.

Darjean contends that there are intentional omissions on the bankruptcy schedules. The judge noted that Sanders may have deleted social media posts and failed to produce records related to his NIL deals. These omissions may be grounds to deny Sanders a discharge of his debt under bankruptcy law.

Many people’s impression of the case makes them contemplate the fairness and equity of decisions and consequences of what a younger Shilo did affecting him now. What many people seem to be unaware of is that, for all intents and purposes, he has already had “his day in court” and the reality is that the plaintiff’s judgment is indeed final and unappealable and will be a lien that will “follow him around” and “attach” to any property he may acquire in the future. The same court that gave us NIL with one hand, will not leave creditors out in the cold: Pacta Sunt Servanda; “liens pass through bankruptcy unaffected.” Dewsnup v. Timm et. al 502 U.S. 410, 417 (1992).

An important lesson to be gleaned from this is for people to understand the importance of not defaulting on appearances and judgments in civil courts. Some people say cynically they will not worry about these civil filings because they are “judgment proof”. Shilo Sanders, to his benefit is not, nor was he really ever judgment proof. He is projected to be drafted in the top ten spots of the NFL draft

Deion Sanders has downplayed Darjean’s claims, labeling them as a “money grab,” while Shilo contends that he acted in self-defense.  

The problem with Deion’s assertion that “this is just a money grab” is that 99.999% of the time that someone says this, the claim or controversy is incipient, or at the stage of being a demand letter, or a lawsuit filed and served, but when you already have a judgment lien, against a to say the least solvent party, the money is as good as grabbed.