Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many people supporting Baldoni did not even understand that Freedman chose not to move to dismiss any of her claims, so are completely shocked at this result which leaves all of her claims intact and nearly none of his. And the ones of his that remain will involve little in the way of monetary damages, because the film made so much money.

What was even the strategy for that? Most cases I follow will usually try to dismiss claims even if it doesn't work

The "strategy" was the MTD would give them a roadmap of the deficiencies in Livelys complaint and by not filing, Lively was locked in to a deficient complaint without knowing it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many people supporting Baldoni did not even understand that Freedman chose not to move to dismiss any of her claims, so are completely shocked at this result which leaves all of her claims intact and nearly none of his. And the ones of his that remain will involve little in the way of monetary damages, because the film made so much money.

What was even the strategy for that? Most cases I follow will usually try to dismiss claims even if it doesn't work

Blake just dropped a significant part of her case last week, no MTD required.

No, the significant parts of her case are sexual harassment and retaliation and she did not drop either.

Still not in touch with reality even with a win today. Intentional infliction of emotional distress was a key part of her damages claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many people supporting Baldoni did not even understand that Freedman chose not to move to dismiss any of her claims, so are completely shocked at this result which leaves all of her claims intact and nearly none of his. And the ones of his that remain will involve little in the way of monetary damages, because the film made so much money.

What was even the strategy for that? Most cases I follow will usually try to dismiss claims even if it doesn't work

Blake just dropped a significant part of her case last week, no MTD required.

No, the significant parts of her case are sexual harassment and retaliation and she did not drop either.

Still not in touch with reality even with a win today. Intentional infliction of emotional distress was a key part of her damages claim.

Wait a minute let me write down some notes here on all your deep thoughts for how to conduct successful litigation lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many people supporting Baldoni did not even understand that Freedman chose not to move to dismiss any of her claims, so are completely shocked at this result which leaves all of her claims intact and nearly none of his. And the ones of his that remain will involve little in the way of monetary damages, because the film made so much money.

What was even the strategy for that? Most cases I follow will usually try to dismiss claims even if it doesn't work

Blake just dropped a significant part of her case last week, no MTD required.

No, the significant parts of her case are sexual harassment and retaliation and she did not drop either.

Still not in touch with reality even with a win today. Intentional infliction of emotional distress was a key part of her damages claim.

DP I think Livelys main concern is her image, not financial damages. Ironic I know because filing the case is hurting her, but what she needs is to win on SH or retaliation, to prove the backlash during the film was not organic. I'm not saying I agree but that's what I think is most important to her side, to either win those claims or settle with Baldoni admitting fault.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many people supporting Baldoni did not even understand that Freedman chose not to move to dismiss any of her claims, so are completely shocked at this result which leaves all of her claims intact and nearly none of his. And the ones of his that remain will involve little in the way of monetary damages, because the film made so much money.

What was even the strategy for that? Most cases I follow will usually try to dismiss claims even if it doesn't work

Blake just dropped a significant part of her case last week, no MTD required.

No, the significant parts of her case are sexual harassment and retaliation and she did not drop either.

Still not in touch with reality even with a win today. Intentional infliction of emotional distress was a key part of her damages claim.

No, you don't understand how her claims are structured.

She's actually still claiming emotional distress and pain and suffering as part of her damages. And yes, she will need to produce evidence if she wants to recover them. But since these are just damages for her other claims, not independent claims on their own. So if she wins on SH and retaliation, she can request damages for her emotional distress and pain and suffering as it relates to the SH and retaliation.

She dropped the independent claim for "intentional infliction of emotional distress" because keeping it would require her to submit so certain medical discovery that is very invasive. Not just disclosing things like therapists notes (already quite invasive) but opening the door for Baldoni to request she be evaluated by an "independent" expert. This is what happened with Amber Heard, and the independent experts diagnosed her with BPD, and this narrative was used against her at trial to pain her as a liar and discredit all her claims (even ones for which she had video evidence or corroborating witnesses).

She can drop that intentional infliction of ED claim and still proceed with all her core claims AND she can still get pain and suffering, including for emotional distress, if she wins. But it doesn't expose her to the same risks in terms of being impeached with allegations of mental instability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many people supporting Baldoni did not even understand that Freedman chose not to move to dismiss any of her claims, so are completely shocked at this result which leaves all of her claims intact and nearly none of his. And the ones of his that remain will involve little in the way of monetary damages, because the film made so much money.

What was even the strategy for that? Most cases I follow will usually try to dismiss claims even if it doesn't work

The "strategy" was the MTD would give them a roadmap of the deficiencies in Livelys complaint and by not filing, Lively was locked in to a deficient complaint without knowing it.

I'm sorry, are we still be lectured on legal strategy by JB supporters today?

No shame, just no shame whatsoever.

Anyway, no, I will not be accepting direct quotes from Bryan Freedman to TMZ as worthwhile legal analysis moving forward. Try again.

[Anonymous]

Please feel free to come back to explain how it was that you got this so wrong and maybe reassess your position, as opposed to telling Lively supporters what Lively is doing wrong here and how her case must fail.

Judge denied almost all your guy’s claims. Stop lecturing us. Take your lumps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But surely what Gottlieb really regrets now is that he has provided Freedman a roadmap for his remaining two claims instead of refraining to file any MTD at all. So I guess he sent them to the grocery store for milk, or the hardware store for nails, or something like that, and surely has deep regrets because although Gottlieb was able to obtain nearly everything on his list, now Freedman knows what’s on his list, or something like that.

Is this sarcastic? I think this was a good day for Lively but I think overall this case has been horrible for her, and I think a trial would be a big mistake. I think the Lively people on here will snark, but I objectively think this would be a great opportunity for her to push for a settlement and try to end this mess that she shouldn’t have started. And no, I’m not saying for 400 million. Maybe that each agree to withdraw claims and release a joint statement and donate a sum to some NFP. Unfortunately I wonder if her team is giving her smart guidance though

It sounds like HIS team gave him terrible guidance.

How so? He came out swinging and reset the conversation quite a bit. If I had just read that article, I would have thought he was a total creep. I have had random people send me the snark tik toks on Blake. People who are as liberal as they come and not misogynists. She misplayed this here, and a lot of people don’t like her now. I think you can admit that. If she had a legit claim, she should have brought it forward using Normal channels and not leaked a one sided piece to the NYT

Babe, he lost. It's crazy y'all can't see this. He filed a BS complaint and it got dismissed before discovery was complete. Do you realize how rarely cases get dismissed at the MTD stage? This is a HUGE loss for Baldoni and Wayfarer. You can look at all the tik toks slamming Blake you want (which would exist even if this case doesn't, because to paraphrase Baldoni's own PR team, people just really want to hate a woman) but it doesn't change this simple fact:

HE LOST

I disagree.

Oof. These are the sorts of comments I’m seeing in reactions online..

‘Lively group celebrating like they won... it was a technicality of how the lawsuit was filed.
Not to mention, the court that really matters here is Court of Public Opinion, and she lost already’

It is not a "technicality." The judge has said that there is no legal basis for the defamation and extortion claims. That's substantive. They were dismissed with prejudice. He's saying that even if they cured the group pleading issue (which they should have cured months ago anyway), the claims would fail because the aren't even alleging anything for which they could claim damages.

And trust me, the court of public opinion is going to be swayed by a bunch of headlines stating (truthfully) that Baldoni lost his great big legal action against Lively, Reynolds, the NYT, and her publicist. YOU hate her with the heat of a thousand suns, but most people don't care enough about any of it to hate her that much. This is much, much more damaging for Baldoni's public image than hers.

Completely agree. The misogynistic hate piled on Lively in this thread was disturbing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But surely what Gottlieb really regrets now is that he has provided Freedman a roadmap for his remaining two claims instead of refraining to file any MTD at all. So I guess he sent them to the grocery store for milk, or the hardware store for nails, or something like that, and surely has deep regrets because although Gottlieb was able to obtain nearly everything on his list, now Freedman knows what’s on his list, or something like that.

Is this sarcastic? I think this was a good day for Lively but I think overall this case has been horrible for her, and I think a trial would be a big mistake. I think the Lively people on here will snark, but I objectively think this would be a great opportunity for her to push for a settlement and try to end this mess that she shouldn’t have started. And no, I’m not saying for 400 million. Maybe that each agree to withdraw claims and release a joint statement and donate a sum to some NFP. Unfortunately I wonder if her team is giving her smart guidance though

It sounds like HIS team gave him terrible guidance.

How so? He came out swinging and reset the conversation quite a bit. If I had just read that article, I would have thought he was a total creep. I have had random people send me the snark tik toks on Blake. People who are as liberal as they come and not misogynists. She misplayed this here, and a lot of people don’t like her now. I think you can admit that. If she had a legit claim, she should have brought it forward using Normal channels and not leaked a one sided piece to the NYT

Babe, he lost. It's crazy y'all can't see this. He filed a BS complaint and it got dismissed before discovery was complete. Do you realize how rarely cases get dismissed at the MTD stage? This is a HUGE loss for Baldoni and Wayfarer. You can look at all the tik toks slamming Blake you want (which would exist even if this case doesn't, because to paraphrase Baldoni's own PR team, people just really want to hate a woman) but it doesn't change this simple fact:

HE LOST

I disagree.

Oof. These are the sorts of comments I’m seeing in reactions online..

‘Lively group celebrating like they won... it was a technicality of how the lawsuit was filed.
Not to mention, the court that really matters here is Court of Public Opinion, and she lost already’

It is not a "technicality." The judge has said that there is no legal basis for the defamation and extortion claims. That's substantive. They were dismissed with prejudice. He's saying that even if they cured the group pleading issue (which they should have cured months ago anyway), the claims would fail because the aren't even alleging anything for which they could claim damages.

And trust me, the court of public opinion is going to be swayed by a bunch of headlines stating (truthfully) that Baldoni lost his great big legal action against Lively, Reynolds, the NYT, and her publicist. YOU hate her with the heat of a thousand suns, but most people don't care enough about any of it to hate her that much. This is much, much more damaging for Baldoni's public image than hers.

Completely agree. The misogynistic hate piled on Lively in this thread was disturbing.

DP. Agree 💯

[Anonymous]

Do Baldoni supporters even have an identity outside of lecturing Lively supporters on what (they think) the law is and how Lively should be settling the case immediately?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many people supporting Baldoni did not even understand that Freedman chose not to move to dismiss any of her claims, so are completely shocked at this result which leaves all of her claims intact and nearly none of his. And the ones of his that remain will involve little in the way of monetary damages, because the film made so much money.

What was even the strategy for that? Most cases I follow will usually try to dismiss claims even if it doesn't work

Blake just dropped a significant part of her case last week, no MTD required.

No, the significant parts of her case are sexual harassment and retaliation and she did not drop either.

Still not in touch with reality even with a win today. Intentional infliction of emotional distress was a key part of her damages claim.

No, you don't understand how her claims are structured.

She's actually still claiming emotional distress and pain and suffering as part of her damages. And yes, she will need to produce evidence if she wants to recover them. But since these are just damages for her other claims, not independent claims on their own. So if she wins on SH and retaliation, she can request damages for her emotional distress and pain and suffering as it relates to the SH and retaliation.

She dropped the independent claim for "intentional infliction of emotional distress" because keeping it would require her to submit so certain medical discovery that is very invasive. Not just disclosing things like therapists notes (already quite invasive) but opening the door for Baldoni to request she be evaluated by an "independent" expert. This is what happened with Amber Heard, and the independent experts diagnosed her with BPD, and this narrative was used against her at trial to pain her as a liar and discredit all her claims (even ones for which she had video evidence or corroborating witnesses).

She can drop that intentional infliction of ED claim and still proceed with all her core claims AND she can still get pain and suffering, including for emotional distress, if she wins. But it doesn't expose her to the same risks in terms of being impeached with allegations of mental instability.

No that isn’t correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many people supporting Baldoni did not even understand that Freedman chose not to move to dismiss any of her claims, so are completely shocked at this result which leaves all of her claims intact and nearly none of his. And the ones of his that remain will involve little in the way of monetary damages, because the film made so much money.

What was even the strategy for that? Most cases I follow will usually try to dismiss claims even if it doesn't work

Blake just dropped a significant part of her case last week, no MTD required.

No, the significant parts of her case are sexual harassment and retaliation and she did not drop either.

Still not in touch with reality even with a win today. Intentional infliction of emotional distress was a key part of her damages claim.

No, you don't understand how her claims are structured.

She's actually still claiming emotional distress and pain and suffering as part of her damages. And yes, she will need to produce evidence if she wants to recover them. But since these are just damages for her other claims, not independent claims on their own. So if she wins on SH and retaliation, she can request damages for her emotional distress and pain and suffering as it relates to the SH and retaliation.

She dropped the independent claim for "intentional infliction of emotional distress" because keeping it would require her to submit so certain medical discovery that is very invasive. Not just disclosing things like therapists notes (already quite invasive) but opening the door for Baldoni to request she be evaluated by an "independent" expert. This is what happened with Amber Heard, and the independent experts diagnosed her with BPD, and this narrative was used against her at trial to pain her as a liar and discredit all her claims (even ones for which she had video evidence or corroborating witnesses).

She can drop that intentional infliction of ED claim and still proceed with all her core claims AND she can still get pain and suffering, including for emotional distress, if she wins. But it doesn't expose her to the same risks in terms of being impeached with allegations of mental instability.

No that isn’t correct.

She can get emotional damages which are premised on her own testimony. But dropping intentional infliction of emotional distress does limit her, she can’t provide any “neutral,” I.e. medical expert testimony, on the issue.

[Anonymous]

I think people don't understand how fickle the public is. BL just got a huge win. JB lost... and tried to take down a feminist law. If BL wins on sexual harassment (I don't personally see it, but I think a lot depends on if any other complainants come forward or witnesses with corroboration, both of which are more likely now with this loss) or retaliation (I think this is more likely than not), she will eventually be vindicated by this lawsuit and JB will become the bad guy and certainly his feminist brand is already dead. If she loses the suit, I agree this will all have been net negative for her, but I think the folks acting like the PR war is over and BL has lost are completely misguided.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think people don't understand how fickle the public is. BL just got a huge win. JB lost... and tried to take down a feminist law. If BL wins on sexual harassment (I don't personally see it, but I think a lot depends on if any other complainants come forward or witnesses with corroboration, both of which are more likely now with this loss) or retaliation (I think this is more likely than not), she will eventually be vindicated by this lawsuit and JB will become the bad guy and certainly his feminist brand is already dead. If she loses the suit, I agree this will all have been net negative for her, but I think the folks acting like the PR war is over and BL has lost are completely misguided.

People didn’t like her before the lawsuit. She alienates people whenever she opens her mouth. Which is why her product lines went nowhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But surely what Gottlieb really regrets now is that he has provided Freedman a roadmap for his remaining two claims instead of refraining to file any MTD at all. So I guess he sent them to the grocery store for milk, or the hardware store for nails, or something like that, and surely has deep regrets because although Gottlieb was able to obtain nearly everything on his list, now Freedman knows what’s on his list, or something like that.

Here is the Freedman quote this references where Freedman explains his decision not to file any MTDs:

“Ms. Lively’s recent motion to dismiss herself from the self-concocted disaster she initiated is one of the most abhorrent examples of abusing our legal system....Stringent rules are put into place to protect the innocent and allow individuals to rightfully defend themselves. Laws are not meant to be twisted and curated by privileged elites to fit their own personal agenda. As we said in response to Mr. Reynolds’ same cowardly measures, we will continue to hold Ms. Lively accountable for her actions of pure malice which include falsely accusing my clients of harassment and retaliation. Her fantastical claims will be swiftly debunked as discovery moves forward, easily disproved with actual, evidentiary proof.

“We strategically made decisions to file answers to these complaints. This is not because we do not have grounds to file motions to dismiss but because in this day of courts giving wide discretion for leave to amend, we are not interested in providing them with a chance to learn just how poorly their legal theory has been drafted and a road map on how to correct it.

“We would rather lock them into their deficiently drafted complaints and thus, force them to proceed through the case with lawsuits that are replete with glaringly legal and factual problems. Ryan and Blake are going to have to dance with the one that brought them here and if they expect us to help educate them on how to do this properly then they are going to the hardware store for milk."

Which, on reconsideration, was a terrible strategy. He got lots of headlines for this months ago and lots of love from Baldoni supporters who said this was actually, but many of us roundly criticized Freedman for this. IYKUK.