Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

I also feel like their PR people are failing them miserably. They are working from a playbook from over a decade ago. Leslie Sloan just needs to hang it up if she is still involved.

I don’t think there’s a universe where they come out looking great during all this, obviously, it’s a crisis and they are in a rough spot (entirely of their own making, but still), but they’ve definitely had a number of missteps that could’ve been avoided.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I also feel like their PR people are failing them miserably. They are working from a playbook from over a decade ago. Leslie Sloan just needs to hang it up if she is still involved.

I don’t think there’s a universe where they come out looking great during all this, obviously, it’s a crisis and they are in a rough spot (entirely of their own making, but still), but they’ve definitely had a number of missteps that could’ve been avoided.

Completely agree

[Anonymous]

I don’t think they should settle when that means paying Baldoni money. Isn’t most of his case going to vanish with the motions to dismiss, whereas none of hers is even really challenged? I think if they are able to get bad facts out about the actual bad actions take. By the PR team etc then people will start to see their side more. That was her reason for filing the suit in the first place, so let’s see what’s in the discovery.

If they do settle once discovery rolls in, maybe that signals to me that discovery resulted in a nothingburger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think they should settle when that means paying Baldoni money. Isn’t most of his case going to vanish with the motions to dismiss, whereas none of hers is even really challenged? I think if they are able to get bad facts out about the actual bad actions take. By the PR team etc then people will start to see their side more. That was her reason for filing the suit in the first place, so let’s see what’s in the discovery.

If they do settle once discovery rolls in, maybe that signals to me that discovery resulted in a nothingburger.

What MTD?

[Anonymous]

Baldoni supporters are always so quick to post here about how Lively should be settling immediately. It’s so weird to me. Like, if you really believe he was wronged by Lively, wouldn’t you want to see that come out at trial? I kind of feel like you think he has public sentiment behind him rn so it’s a good place for him to stop, ha, before (more) damaging details come out, or he loses claims in the MTDs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Baldoni supporters are always so quick to post here about how Lively should be settling immediately. It’s so weird to me. Like, if you really believe he was wronged by Lively, wouldn’t you want to see that come out at trial? I kind of feel like you think he has public sentiment behind him rn so it’s a good place for him to stop, ha, before (more) damaging details come out, or he loses claims in the MTDs.

95 percent of cases end in settlement and that will most likely be the case here. Thus far, Blake and Ryan are taking most of the PR hit. No reason to think that will change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious (but dumb) question: are you allowed to cull out your emails and texts during the time you are considering filing a lawsuit but before you file it? And warn your friends to do the same? Nothing is filed yet so there is no hold order.

Maybe I watch too many crime things and maybe this only applies to criminal investigations, but in every true crime doc I’ve seen recently everyone tries to delete their text and their Internet searches and the police always find them. So I assume this is not the case for civil cases?

The government has greater ability to get things directly from cell phone companies, and can even issue preservation orders to them, before a target even knows a case exists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Baldoni supporters are always so quick to post here about how Lively should be settling immediately. It’s so weird to me. Like, if you really believe he was wronged by Lively, wouldn’t you want to see that come out at trial? I kind of feel like you think he has public sentiment behind him rn so it’s a good place for him to stop, ha, before (more) damaging details come out, or he loses claims in the MTDs.

Not at all. I’m Pp and not a ‘Baldoni supporter’ per se, I just looked at the facts so far and think she has no case and that he does have a good case. But litigation is messy and draining and time consuming (even if you win) and if I were Blake’s team, I’d cut my losses and move on. And if I were Jason’s team, I’d encourage him to settle as well he can move on too. I don’t think justin is a Johnny Depp type who wants to see someone suffer and humiliated during a trial. He can get back to his projects, she can get back to being a mom and whatever else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think they should settle when that means paying Baldoni money. Isn’t most of his case going to vanish with the motions to dismiss, whereas none of hers is even really challenged? I think if they are able to get bad facts out about the actual bad actions take. By the PR team etc then people will start to see their side more. That was her reason for filing the suit in the first place, so let’s see what’s in the discovery.

If they do settle once discovery rolls in, maybe that signals to me that discovery resulted in a nothingburger.

What MTD?

Most of Baldoni’s claims against Lively have been challenged by the parties in motions to dismiss. Freedman just fought over coughing up various financials for his clients and lost except in terms of tax returns mostly. The fact that he fought these doc requests could also be signaling they can’t really show $400M in lost profits. Baldoni alone made $50M in profits off the movie and frankly doesn’t ever have to work again. If a lot of his claims get dismissed and the damages he is claiming go down, not sure there is a reason to settle unless Sarowitz is going to fork over a bunch of cash to Lively.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think they should settle when that means paying Baldoni money. Isn’t most of his case going to vanish with the motions to dismiss, whereas none of hers is even really challenged? I think if they are able to get bad facts out about the actual bad actions take. By the PR team etc then people will start to see their side more. That was her reason for filing the suit in the first place, so let’s see what’s in the discovery.

If they do settle once discovery rolls in, maybe that signals to me that discovery resulted in a nothingburger.

What MTD?

Most of Baldoni’s claims against Lively have been challenged by the parties in motions to dismiss. Freedman just fought over coughing up various financials for his clients and lost except in terms of tax returns mostly. The fact that he fought these doc requests could also be signaling they can’t really show $400M in lost profits. Baldoni alone made $50M in profits off the movie and frankly doesn’t ever have to work again. If a lot of his claims get dismissed and the damages he is claiming go down, not sure there is a reason to settle unless Sarowitz is going to fork over a bunch of cash to Lively.

Freedman actually had agreed to give them most of those documents in his response (but had not turned them over yet) and then mostly won the categories still in dispute.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think they should settle when that means paying Baldoni money. Isn’t most of his case going to vanish with the motions to dismiss, whereas none of hers is even really challenged? I think if they are able to get bad facts out about the actual bad actions take. By the PR team etc then people will start to see their side more. That was her reason for filing the suit in the first place, so let’s see what’s in the discovery.

If they do settle once discovery rolls in, maybe that signals to me that discovery resulted in a nothingburger.

What MTD?

Most of Baldoni’s claims against Lively have been challenged by the parties in motions to dismiss. Freedman just fought over coughing up various financials for his clients and lost except in terms of tax returns mostly. The fact that he fought these doc requests could also be signaling they can’t really show $400M in lost profits. Baldoni alone made $50M in profits off the movie and frankly doesn’t ever have to work again. If a lot of his claims get dismissed and the damages he is claiming go down, not sure there is a reason to settle unless Sarowitz is going to fork over a bunch of cash to Lively.

Lol. Those MTD weren’t granted. Tiny difference, no?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think they should settle when that means paying Baldoni money. Isn’t most of his case going to vanish with the motions to dismiss, whereas none of hers is even really challenged? I think if they are able to get bad facts out about the actual bad actions take. By the PR team etc then people will start to see their side more. That was her reason for filing the suit in the first place, so let’s see what’s in the discovery.

If they do settle once discovery rolls in, maybe that signals to me that discovery resulted in a nothingburger.

What MTD?

Most of Baldoni’s claims against Lively have been challenged by the parties in motions to dismiss. Freedman just fought over coughing up various financials for his clients and lost except in terms of tax returns mostly. The fact that he fought these doc requests could also be signaling they can’t really show $400M in lost profits. Baldoni alone made $50M in profits off the movie and frankly doesn’t ever have to work again. If a lot of his claims get dismissed and the damages he is claiming go down, not sure there is a reason to settle unless Sarowitz is going to fork over a bunch of cash to Lively.

Freedman actually had agreed to give them most of those documents in his response (but had not turned them over yet) and then mostly won the categories still in dispute.

I actually don’t think that’s quite right, though I understand how you’d want to posture it that way. I thought Freedman was only agreeing to provide some limited number of docs of his own choosing that dealt with those issues, and not the full range that was required from the doc requests, and the Willkie lawyers called him on that in their response (and the judge enforced Willkie’s language). Otherwise, there wouldn’t be a dispute on those issues and the judge would not have ordered Freedman to so produce (which he did).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think they should settle when that means paying Baldoni money. Isn’t most of his case going to vanish with the motions to dismiss, whereas none of hers is even really challenged? I think if they are able to get bad facts out about the actual bad actions take. By the PR team etc then people will start to see their side more. That was her reason for filing the suit in the first place, so let’s see what’s in the discovery.

If they do settle once discovery rolls in, maybe that signals to me that discovery resulted in a nothingburger.

What MTD?

Most of Baldoni’s claims against Lively have been challenged by the parties in motions to dismiss. Freedman just fought over coughing up various financials for his clients and lost except in terms of tax returns mostly. The fact that he fought these doc requests could also be signaling they can’t really show $400M in lost profits. Baldoni alone made $50M in profits off the movie and frankly doesn’t ever have to work again. If a lot of his claims get dismissed and the damages he is claiming go down, not sure there is a reason to settle unless Sarowitz is going to fork over a bunch of cash to Lively.

Lol. Those MTD weren’t granted. Tiny difference, no?

^^ Again, I don’t think you understand litigation whatsoever at all. First, everyone always fights motions, or almost always. That’s the game. It doesn’t mean they can’t convince a jury of damages. And two, asking for 400m doesn’t mean they won’t settle for anything less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think they should settle when that means paying Baldoni money. Isn’t most of his case going to vanish with the motions to dismiss, whereas none of hers is even really challenged? I think if they are able to get bad facts out about the actual bad actions take. By the PR team etc then people will start to see their side more. That was her reason for filing the suit in the first place, so let’s see what’s in the discovery.

If they do settle once discovery rolls in, maybe that signals to me that discovery resulted in a nothingburger.

What MTD?

Most of Baldoni’s claims against Lively have been challenged by the parties in motions to dismiss. Freedman just fought over coughing up various financials for his clients and lost except in terms of tax returns mostly. The fact that he fought these doc requests could also be signaling they can’t really show $400M in lost profits. Baldoni alone made $50M in profits off the movie and frankly doesn’t ever have to work again. If a lot of his claims get dismissed and the damages he is claiming go down, not sure there is a reason to settle unless Sarowitz is going to fork over a bunch of cash to Lively.

Freedman actually had agreed to give them most of those documents in his response (but had not turned them over yet) and then mostly won the categories still in dispute.

I actually don’t think that’s quite right, though I understand how you’d want to posture it that way. I thought Freedman was only agreeing to provide some limited number of docs of his own choosing that dealt with those issues, and not the full range that was required from the doc requests, and the Willkie lawyers called him on that in their response (and the judge enforced Willkie’s language). Otherwise, there wouldn’t be a dispute on those issues and the judge would not have ordered Freedman to so produce (which he did).

And Willkie can still come back for the tax filings later if the docs they receive don’t provide enough info — the court left that open.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think they should settle when that means paying Baldoni money. Isn’t most of his case going to vanish with the motions to dismiss, whereas none of hers is even really challenged? I think if they are able to get bad facts out about the actual bad actions take. By the PR team etc then people will start to see their side more. That was her reason for filing the suit in the first place, so let’s see what’s in the discovery.

If they do settle once discovery rolls in, maybe that signals to me that discovery resulted in a nothingburger.

What MTD?

Most of Baldoni’s claims against Lively have been challenged by the parties in motions to dismiss. Freedman just fought over coughing up various financials for his clients and lost except in terms of tax returns mostly. The fact that he fought these doc requests could also be signaling they can’t really show $400M in lost profits. Baldoni alone made $50M in profits off the movie and frankly doesn’t ever have to work again. If a lot of his claims get dismissed and the damages he is claiming go down, not sure there is a reason to settle unless Sarowitz is going to fork over a bunch of cash to Lively.

Lol. Those MTD weren’t granted. Tiny difference, no?

Are you new here? The MTDs challenging most or all of Baldoni’s claims (and Lively’s claims against Jed Wallace) are briefed but not yet decided. Only bad things can happen there for Baldoni by his claims being thrown out. None of Lively’s are challenged besides Wallace. The judge has already signaled that there is a good chance Baldoni’s claims against deep pockets NYT will be dismissed.