A federal judge in Denver has issued key pretrial rulings in the bankruptcy case of former Colorado football player Shilo Sanders, determining which evidence will be admissible during his upcoming Aug. 31 trial. The proceedings center on whether an $11.89 million debt owed to former school security guard John Darjean can be discharged through Chapter 7 bankruptcy or if it stems from a “willful and malicious injury” that must be repaid, according to court documents filed July 15, 2026.
The Legal Threshold: Willful and Malicious Injury
The core of the bankruptcy trial is a legal determination of whether the debt, resulting from a 2015 incident at a Dallas school, qualifies for discharge. Under federal law, debts arising from willful and malicious injury are generally non-dischargeable. Judge Michael Romero, who held a private hearing on July 14, will oversee the trial to decide if Sanders’ actions meet this threshold.
If the court determines the injury was not willful or that it occurred in self-defense, Sanders may successfully discharge the debt. If the court finds the injury was malicious, he remains liable for the $11.89 million judgment, which originated from a 2016 lawsuit where Sanders failed to appear, leading to a default judgment against him.
Did you know?
In bankruptcy law, a “default judgment” occurs when a defendant fails to respond or show up for trial. Shilo Sanders is currently attempting to resolve a multi-million dollar debt that was finalized in 2022 after he did not participate in the original litigation.
Rulings on Expert Testimony and Juvenile Records
Judge Romero has established specific boundaries for the evidence allowed at trial. According to the court’s summary, the judge may permit expert testimony regarding whether “reasonable force” was used during the 2015 altercation. This testimony is intended to rebut Sanders’ ongoing claim that he acted in self-defense when he allegedly assaulted Darjean.
Regarding Sanders’ time at the Letot juvenile detention facility, the judge granted a request to limit evidence, with one critical exception: records containing “party admissions” remain admissible. These records may include statements made by Sanders himself at the time of the incident. The judge also denied, for the time being, requests to restrict the scope of Sanders’ disciplinary history and other state agency records, though these rulings were made “without prejudice,” leaving the door open for future objections during the trial.
Broader Implications for Athlete Debt
Sanders, 26, played at the University of Colorado in 2023 and 2024. Following a stint with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers as an undrafted free agent, he has shifted his focus toward social media and other professional pursuits.
Beyond this case, court records indicate Sanders faces additional financial pressure, including a separate lawsuit from a law firm claiming he owes $170,000 in unpaid fees.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary goal of the August 31 trial?
The trial will determine if Shilo Sanders’ $11.89 million debt is “dischargeable.” If the court rules the debt resulted from a “willful and malicious injury,” he must pay it. If not, the debt may be wiped out through bankruptcy.
Why was the July 14 hearing held in private?
Judge Romero held the hearing in private because the motions were filed under seal and involved records pertaining to Sanders’ status as a minor during the 2015 incident.
Can the judge change these evidentiary rulings?
Yes. Many of the judge’s denials regarding the limitation of evidence were issued “without prejudice,” meaning the court can revisit these specific objections during the trial or after deposition testimony is finalized.
Stay informed on this developing case by subscribing to our newsletter for updates on the August 31 bankruptcy trial. Have questions or insights on the legal proceedings? Join the conversation in the comments section below.
Related reading
