Pavel Kolmogorov

I am a seasoned and accomplished litigator with a distinguished track record of success in navigating complex civil litigation. I earned my Master of Laws (LL.M.) degree from UC Berkeley School of Law, one of the nation’s most prestigious legal institutions, and am admitted to the State Bar of California and Washington D.C. My career spans a wide range of legal practice areas, including business litigation, trademark and copyright disputes, inverse condemnation, defamation, premises liability, and personal injury cases.

My deep understanding of the legal system, coupled with my sharp analytical skills and strategic thinking, has enabled me to achieve outstanding results for my clients. I have successfully represented individuals and businesses in State and Federal Courts, as well as in arbitrations and mediations, consistently delivering favorable outcomes in high-stakes disputes.

Known for my meticulous preparation, persuasive advocacy, and unwavering commitment to my clients, I provide exceptional legal representation tailored to meet the unique needs of each case. Whether tackling intricate legal challenges or fighting for justice, my professionalism and dedication make me a trusted ally for those seeking outstanding legal services.

• Free Consultation
• Credit Cards Accepted

California

State Bar of California

ID Number: 321018

Since 2018

Litigation Counsel

Kolmogorov Law

2024 - Current

Senior Litigation Counsel

Brower Law Group, APC

2021 - 2024

Litigation Associate

Barrington Legal, Inc.

2019 - 2021

Attorney

Hausfeld, LLP

2017 - 2018

University of California, Berkeley School of Law

Client's Choice

Avvo

2024

Silver Client Champion

Martindale-Hubbell

2024

California State Bar  # 321018

2018 - Current

Q. Does a keymaster arcade game be considered a vending machine?

December 20, 2024

A: A keymaster arcade game may not be considered a vending machine under California law. According to Bus. & Prof.Code § 17571, a "vending machine" is defined as any mechanical device that operates by the insertion of a coin or other thing of value and dispenses a product, service, or exchange of equal value (Bus. & Prof.Code § 17571. Similarly, 9 CCR § 7211 excludes machines providing services of a recreational nature from the definition of vending machines (9 CCR § 7211). Additionally, 21 CCR § 2204 defines vending machines as devices that are self-service, coin-operated, and used for the sale and dispensing of food or merchandise (21 CCR § 2204).

However, keymaster arcade games, which involve an element of chance and potentially offer prizes, may be more closely related to slot machines or gaming devices. Under Cal.Penal Code § 330b, a slot machine or device is defined as one that operates by the insertion of money and, due to an element of chance, may entitle the user to receive money, credit, or other things of value (Cal.Penal Code § 330b).

Case law, People ex rel. Green v. Grewal, has held that devices offering prizes based on chance are considered slot machines (People ex rel. Green v. Grewal (2015) 61 Cal.4th 544.)

Therefore, a keymaster arcade game is more likely to be classified as a slot machine rather than a vending machine under California law.

Obviously, I cannot advise you whether placing a slot machine would violate your lease agreement without reviewing its specific terms. If you’d like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to reach out. ... Read More

Q. Business model legality and company formation?

December 19, 2024

A: The business model described, which involves sharing sports betting predictions and odds without facilitating actual betting or linking to gambling sites, may not fall under the definition of gambling in many jurisdictions. However, the legality can vary significantly by state.

In California, for example, the law distinguishes between different forms of gambling and betting. The California Penal Code § 330 prohibits certain types of gambling games but does not explicitly address the sharing of betting predictions or odds without actual betting. Additionally, the California Gambling Control Act requires a state gambling license for gambling enterprises, but it is unclear if this applies to a service that only provides predictions (Lucky Chances, Inc. v. California Gambling Control Commission (2024) 106 Cal.App.5th 172).

The California Supreme Court case of In re Hubbard indicates that private betting on the outcome of future events, other than specific regulated activities like horse racing, is not comprehensively regulated by state law, suggesting that not all forms of gambling are prohibited (In re Hubbard (1964) 62 Cal.2d 119).

Federal law, such as the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA), primarily targets financial transactions related to online gambling rather than the sharing of predictions.

The legality of the business model can vary significantly across states. Some states have more stringent regulations on gambling and related activities, while others may have more lenient or unclear regulations.

States with more lenient regulations on gambling-related activities, such as Nevada or New Jersey, might be more favorable for this business model. However, as you can see, your question has no easy answer, as it should be analyzed in a particular context and tailored to your situation. Feel free to reach out if you want to discuss further. ... Read More