The letter-writing campaign in the Floyd Mayweather, Jr.-CSI Entertainment is never-ending. On Friday, the parties supplied a joint-letter to the Court (per the Court’s wishes) outlining the contested issues and how they view the Court should handle the case.
In a letter to Judge Broderick dated July 17, 2026, the parties offer its position as it relates to the issue of “Irreparable harm” to determine whether the Court should grant CSI Entertainment’s Preliminary Injunction. If you recall, the Court denied CSI Entertainment’s request for an emergency injunction. The briefing schedule for the Preliminary Injunction included briefing on the basis for irreparable harm. The hearing do determine the Preliminary Injunction will not occur until September.
The letter to the Court covered the parties’ position on limited discovery prior to the briefing on irreparable harm. CSI Entertainment provided 8 request for production of documents which were objected to by Mayweather.
The central theme of CSI Entertainment’s argument is that Mayweather is insolvent and could not pay a monetary judgment. In emails to Mayweather’s attorneys CSI Entertainment requests financial information related to Floyd Mayweather’s ownership of tangible assets such as real estate and cars. They argue that after a public records search he only has one residence in his name with all others in trusts and/or LLCs.
Mayweather’s attorneys contend that most of the document discovery requests are not relevant to the issue of irreparable harm and that the information sought was overbroad and burdensome. As in most fights over discovery parameters, one side fights for broad discovery encompassing a broad swath of categories, while the opposition lobbies for a smaller, narrower search. In this case, Mayweather’s attorneys argue that any documents CSI Entertainments needs should already be in there control.
In support of its argument that it is need of financial information, CSI Entertainment outlined the reasons why it needs it. This includes the recent news that Mayweather allegedly wrote a bad check for a watch.
CSI Entertainment also provided a list of his real property which is mostly kept in trusts or LLCs. It would be hard for CSI Entertainment to place a lien on these properties since they are not in his personal name.
CSI Entertainment also argues that Stephen Espinoza, who submitted a declaration on Mayweather’s behalf, is involved in a quid pro quo with him. It is pointed out that Espinoza was sued earlier this year by Mayweather claiming his diverted money from his fights to accounts that he did not authorize. Yet, Espinoza files a declaration supporting the boxer. CSI Entertainment is requesting documents related to Espinoza’s expert declaration to see if there was coercion.
Mayweather attorneys argue that his finances are not in dispute as they had provided declarations from his business manager and “his own declaration on the subject” during the motion for a temporary restraining order earlier this month. They go own to state, “Mr. Mayweather’s position is that CSI already possesses whatever information could possibly be relevant to establish its own purported harm….Even if the Court were inclined to permit limited discovery on this discrete issue, it is no abundantly evident that there is nothing “limited” about the discovery CSI wishes…”
Mayweather’s attorneys claim that the discovery would be nothing more than a “fishing expedition” to see what it could obtain from Mayweather. It notes that the 8 requests seek the same objective: seeking proof of Mayweather’s solvency.
With respect to Espinoza’s involvement, Mayweather attorneys noted he’s not being paid by the boxer. They argue that the issue of Espinoza’s involvement is not germane to the question of proving CSI Entertainment’s “irreparable harm.”
In the coming days, the Court will determine how much, if any of the requests that Mayweather will have to respond to. MPO will keep you updated.
Leave a Reply