Derek Chauvin was found guilty on the three charges he faced — second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter — all 3 for the same crime: pinning George Floyd to the concrete with his knee on Floyd’s neck before Floyd died.
Unintentional second-degree murder is defined as causing death without intent to do so, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense. The maximum sentence for second-degree murder is 40 years. [Defined by NPR]
Third-degree murder is causing death to an individual by “perpetrating an act imminently dangerous to others and evidencing a depraved mind without regard for human life,” but without the intent to cause death. It carries a maximum sentence of 25 years. [Defined by NPR]
Second-degree manslaughter is causing the death of another by “culpable negligence, creating an unreasonable risk” in which the defendant “consciously takes the risk of causing death or great bodily harm to another individual.” It carries a maximum sentence of 10 years. [Defined by NPR]
When juries are given the option of choosing from multiple counts, it begs the issue of how one act may satisfy the criteria for three distinct offenses. In convicting Chauvin of second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter… The jury was not required to determine that Chauvin wanted to kill Floyd. The legal term for your culpable mindset within a criminal act is “mens rea”.
“The intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime, as opposed to the action or conduct of the accused.” -Oxford Dictionary
The sentencing for Chauvin is expected to take place 8 weeks from now.


After losing a court decision over his part in shielding assets from his mother, Temur Akhmedov, the son of a Russian oligarch embroiled in the UK’s biggest divorce lawsuit, will have to compensate his mother $100 million.
Temur Akhmedov and his billionaire father, Farkhad Akhmedov, worked together to prevent his mother from receiving a $627 million court-ordered divorce settlement. The court described Temur as “an untrustworthy person who will go to every length to help his parent (referring to father).“
The trial drew public attention when Temur admitted to losing more than $50 million while day trading as a college student. He argued that instead of shielding his father’s wealth from his mother, he lost some of it by poor investments.
Temur’s mother is attempting to reclaim some of the money by demanding the keys to a luxurious apartment overlooking London’s Hyde Park. She has been denied any divorce settlements, forcing her to depend on attorneys in helping her prosecute lawsuits in at least six nations.


As part of a crackdown on copyrighted material, media conglomerate, ABS-CBN Corp. is suing 40 video piracy outlets. They also released a statement announcing the filing of a $40 million case in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
The broadcasting network said that the websites were infringing on ABS-CBN copyrights and trademarks as described in the case ABS-CBN v. 123Fullpinoymovies.hub.com. They also mentioned that a temporary injunction was recently granted against these 40 pirate domains by the judge.
Pirates, according to ABS-CBN, have thrived since the COVID-19 pandemic. Piracy domains included malware that could corrupt user electronics. Stephen M. Gaffigan and Christine Daley are representing attorneys in the lawsuit.

#Settled – Nike v. MSCHF: Lil Nas X Satan Shoes

Nike and MSCHF have settled over a lawsuit related to a shoe being sold by MSCHF; this case was previously reported by us on March 31st.
MSCHF will begin a voluntary recall of the Satan Shoes and the previously released Jesus Shoes, both of which were based on Nike sneakers, as part of the settlement. Nike has said that MSCHF would buy back the items at their original retail rates.
Nike has denied its involvement with the Satan or Jesus shoes by stating, “Any customers who were puzzled or want to return their shoes for a full refund can do so. Customers who do not return their shoes and then experience a product fault may contact MSCHF rather than Nike.” MSCHF has said a compromise was the only option to bring the case behind it and devote the time to future creative and expressive ideas.
However, it excoriated the shoemaker in a statement announcing the settlement. The statement against Nike by MSCHF was stated by their lawyer David H. Bernstein as “MSCHF intended to comment on the absurdity of the collaboration culture practiced by some brands, and about the perniciousness of intolerance.”

#InTheNews – Update on Commission for SCOTUS

President Joe Biden has established a 36-member bipartisan commission to review possible Supreme Court reforms, fulfilling a campaign pledge. The Presidential Commission will examine the current national debate for and against Supreme Court reform.
According to Ilya Shapiro, the commission is skewed to the left, with liberals outnumbering conservatives by a 3:1 margin. Nonetheless, the commission’s conservatives include big hitters such as former DC Circuit Judge Thomas Griffith and Harvard Law School’s Jack Goldsmith.
The panel also overwhelmingly favors professors, with only a few participants with backgrounds other than legal or political academia. Former Clinton Solicitor General Walter Dellinger and now-professor David Strauss are exceptions to the academic-heavy list.
The commission’s mandate is broader than looking at the possibility of recruiting more judges. The White House said the panel’s agenda includes looking at the court’s position in the Constitutional system, the length of service and turnover of justices, and members and size.

#InTheNews – Tiger King Lawsuit

While Netflix’s “Tiger King” introduced streaming-loving audiences to exotic animals, a legal battle was underway between zoo owners featured in the show and animal advocacy organizations seeking to shut down the cub-petting industry with the support of the federal government.
According to PETA and the Animal Legal Defense Fund, Jeffrey Lowe and Timothy Stark split endangered tiger cubs from their mothers at an early age to build photo opportunities with a paying public, and big cats at Stark’s zoo were held in “woefully insufficient enclosures.” Animal rights activists are attempting to set a precedent under the Endangered Species Act through this. They want to show that the Act extends to individual animals in captivity, which would mean that exhibitors who mistreat endangered species may face federal penalties.
Lowe, Stark, and others are being sued under two sections of the Act. The law forbids the harming, threatening, or killing of an endangered animal, referred to as “taking.” It requires someone with standing to file a complaint against an alleged violator.

#InTheNews – Ice Cube v. Robinhood

Ice Cube has filed a lawsuit against Robinhood for allegedly using his photo and likeness without his permission in Robinhood’s blogpost to promote its services. Ice Cube says that he would not want his name or image to be associated with Robinhood. He refers to Robinhood as a company looting ordinary people’s money by advertising “get rich quick” stocks to them. Ice Cube’s lawsuit’s claim is based on an absence of an endorsement deal and the likelihood of defamation. However, the premise of Ice Cube’s case seems weak. Ice Cube’s lawsuit is based on Robinhood using the line “Correct yourself, before you wreck yourself,” without a prior endorsement deal with Ice Cube. So his claim rests on proving consumers connecting the link between Ice cube’s famous song with the statement. In defense of Robinhood, the term “correct” in the statement mentioned above refers to the market corrections in tech stocks. Further, Ice Cube has never used the word “Correct Yourself” in his song “Check Yo Self.“

#InTheNews – U.S. Postal Service v. Nike

The tables have turned for Nike, a company known for filing lawsuits in its aggressive defense of their Intellectual Property rights. The USPS has filed a lawsuit against Nike for designing USPS’ themed Air Force 1 shoes. USPS states that it will take concrete steps to protect its IP. According to USPS, it shall not sit silently while Nike uses its name and brand to sell expensive shoes without a prior licensing agreement. USPS says that a licensing agreement with Nike can result in royalties, which can be a source of income for USPS for years to come. It can also increase the fondness of consumers towards the USPS Brand. USPS has also accused Nike of being a hypocrite, as it is an aggressive defender of its IP rights while not respecting USPS’s IP rights. For example: Nike’s lawsuit against Lil Nas X’s Satan-themed Nike shoes.

#InTheNews – LA Chargers Sale Dispute

The NFL Team, “Los Angeles Chargers” are currently facing a dispute wherein the sister of Dean Spanos (Chairman of the team), wants the Spanos Family Trust to sell their ownership rights of the Chargers. Dean Spanos is the co-trustee of the Spanos Family Trust that owns 15% of the team and controls 36% of the group. His sister wants to sell their ownership rights to the NFL team as the alleged financial burden of the NFL team is proving to irrecoverable. The co-trustee Dean Spanos is not acting in the best interest of the Trust by not selling off their loss-making share of the NFL Team. Meanwhile, in his reply to his sister’s filing, Dean Spanos has argued that their share in Chargers carries much sentimental value for the Spanos family. They have owned 15% of the team since the 1980s, and that he hopes to turn the ownership profitable in upcoming years. Dean Spanos is also ready to buy his sister’s share in Chargers to prevent the sale of their share in Chargers. However, “hope” is not enough to save a trust. The trustee’s primary goal should be to fulfill their fiduciary duty towards the beneficiaries. An emotional attachment to the NFL Team that the co-trustees are trying to save does not help the co-trustee, Dean, fulfill his fiduciary duty towards the Trust’s beneficiaries. Therefore, Dean’s sister’s case seems to be based on a fundamental principle of the law of trusts.

#InTheNews – New Epstein Lawsuit Filed

Jeffrey Epstein and his accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, had allegedly raped a 26-year-old South Florida real estate broker in early 2008, according to a complaint brought last week. The victim says Epstein trafficked her to other individuals as well, including a local judge. The victim, known only as “Jane Doe,” alleges that at a hotel in Naples, Florida, Epstein and Maxwell repeatedly raped her in front of her 8-year-old baby. She also claims that they forced her to have sex with several other men, including a local judge who remains anonymous. Doe has said she encountered Epstein and Maxwell at a barbeque organized by her boss, who knew Epstein well. She has also alleged that Epstein forced her to go through a vaginal surgery and help him market her as a virgin to his clients. Her boss, who is not included in the lawsuit, informed her that Epstein had decided to rent or buy a house, so she found him one to rent for $10,000 a month. According to the lawsuit, he charged cash and told her not to name the occupant or process Epstein’s identity.