Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Two more apparent Baldoni supporters only seeing attorneys (apparently) urging Lively to take this win and settle to make this case go away.

What does settling mean anymore? Wayfarer has no claims against Lively right now (with a few they can amend but they actually have to do that work). If Lively settles, wouldn't that mean Wayfarer paying her?

DP. They do have some options in that they can re plead. And of course appeal. I don’t see why they wouldn’t re file unless both sides can agree to try to settle. I can’t see wayfarer paying BL. Why would they? But I can see a world where Baldoni is willing to drop his claims and any appeals in exchange for a mutual withdrawal of claims and some sort of concerted PR statement.

That is almost always the better way to go.

Lol, a "mutual withdrawal of claims"? His claims were dismissed by the judge. He can't refile most of them and the ones he can refile, he has yet to produce allegations with a legal basis and there's no indication he is able to. Why would Lively agree to a mutual withdrawal of claims when she is the only one with valid claims still pending?

Y'all are delusional.

She has to now bring sufficient evidence of SH and retaliation to win over a jury. You think her chances are good?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Two more apparent Baldoni supporters only seeing attorneys (apparently) urging Lively to take this win and settle to make this case go away.

What does settling mean anymore? Wayfarer has no claims against Lively right now (with a few they can amend but they actually have to do that work). If Lively settles, wouldn't that mean Wayfarer paying her?

DP. They do have some options in that they can re plead. And of course appeal. I don’t see why they wouldn’t re file unless both sides can agree to try to settle. I can’t see wayfarer paying BL. Why would they? But I can see a world where Baldoni is willing to drop his claims and any appeals in exchange for a mutual withdrawal of claims and some sort of concerted PR statement.

That is almost always the better way to go.

+1. She has the burden of proof now for her claims of SH and retaliation. They can work towards a settlement with a statement that is a bunch of self serving word salad, a donation to anti SA/SH organizations, and call it over.

I totally agree. This is what should happen

[Anonymous]

I wonder whether Vituscka still needs to produce the Freedman docs he agreed to since the claims against Sloane are dismissed. Can only hope!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Two more apparent Baldoni supporters only seeing attorneys (apparently) urging Lively to take this win and settle to make this case go away.

What does settling mean anymore? Wayfarer has no claims against Lively right now (with a few they can amend but they actually have to do that work). If Lively settles, wouldn't that mean Wayfarer paying her?

DP. They do have some options in that they can re plead. And of course appeal. I don’t see why they wouldn’t re file unless both sides can agree to try to settle. I can’t see wayfarer paying BL. Why would they? But I can see a world where Baldoni is willing to drop his claims and any appeals in exchange for a mutual withdrawal of claims and some sort of concerted PR statement.

That is almost always the better way to go.

Lol, a "mutual withdrawal of claims"? His claims were dismissed by the judge. He can't refile most of them and the ones he can refile, he has yet to produce allegations with a legal basis and there's no indication he is able to. Why would Lively agree to a mutual withdrawal of claims when she is the only one with valid claims still pending?

Y'all are delusional.

She has to now bring sufficient evidence of SH and retaliation to win over a jury. You think her chances are good?

I do not

[Anonymous]

^ dp

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder whether Vituscka still needs to produce the Freedman docs he agreed to since the claims against Sloane are dismissed. Can only hope!

Hopefully he handed it in already, lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Two more apparent Baldoni supporters only seeing attorneys (apparently) urging Lively to take this win and settle to make this case go away.

What does settling mean anymore? Wayfarer has no claims against Lively right now (with a few they can amend but they actually have to do that work). If Lively settles, wouldn't that mean Wayfarer paying her?

DP. They do have some options in that they can re plead. And of course appeal. I don’t see why they wouldn’t re file unless both sides can agree to try to settle. I can’t see wayfarer paying BL. Why would they? But I can see a world where Baldoni is willing to drop his claims and any appeals in exchange for a mutual withdrawal of claims and some sort of concerted PR statement.

That is almost always the better way to go.

Lol, a "mutual withdrawal of claims"? His claims were dismissed by the judge. He can't refile most of them and the ones he can refile, he has yet to produce allegations with a legal basis and there's no indication he is able to. Why would Lively agree to a mutual withdrawal of claims when she is the only one with valid claims still pending?

Y'all are delusional.

And most of the claims he has left are worth nada because the film made so much money! But still they will argue this as though she should be so lucky to accept his settlement now. Smh

[Anonymous]

OJ was found not guilty too...

[Anonymous]

Who cares, the public and other A-listers see through this and see her and her husband are evil con artists. You're not putting that genie back in the bottle.

[Anonymous]

Justin's EX cohost is laughing about his loss on ig. She pretended to be his friend for what reason

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Justin's EX cohost is laughing about his loss on ig. She pretended to be his friend for what reason

Maybe she knows stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Two more apparent Baldoni supporters only seeing attorneys (apparently) urging Lively to take this win and settle to make this case go away.

What does settling mean anymore? Wayfarer has no claims against Lively right now (with a few they can amend but they actually have to do that work). If Lively settles, wouldn't that mean Wayfarer paying her?

DP. They do have some options in that they can re plead. And of course appeal. I don’t see why they wouldn’t re file unless both sides can agree to try to settle. I can’t see wayfarer paying BL. Why would they? But I can see a world where Baldoni is willing to drop his claims and any appeals in exchange for a mutual withdrawal of claims and some sort of concerted PR statement.

That is almost always the better way to go.

Lol, a "mutual withdrawal of claims"? His claims were dismissed by the judge. He can't refile most of them and the ones he can refile, he has yet to produce allegations with a legal basis and there's no indication he is able to. Why would Lively agree to a mutual withdrawal of claims when she is the only one with valid claims still pending?

Y'all are delusional.

She has to now bring sufficient evidence of SH and retaliation to win over a jury. You think her chances are good?

DP. Not sure if you are a lawyer and understand that her only monetary risk in these claims at jury trial are attorneys fees. He will not win damages off her claims. Just in case that wasn’t clear, because you seem to be suggesting that he shouldn’t pay her. Her claims, especially her retaliation claims, could be worth quite a bit of money. So your response seems again to not really be accepting reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Two more apparent Baldoni supporters only seeing attorneys (apparently) urging Lively to take this win and settle to make this case go away.

What does settling mean anymore? Wayfarer has no claims against Lively right now (with a few they can amend but they actually have to do that work). If Lively settles, wouldn't that mean Wayfarer paying her?

DP. They do have some options in that they can re plead. And of course appeal. I don’t see why they wouldn’t re file unless both sides can agree to try to settle. I can’t see wayfarer paying BL. Why would they? But I can see a world where Baldoni is willing to drop his claims and any appeals in exchange for a mutual withdrawal of claims and some sort of concerted PR statement.

That is almost always the better way to go.

Lol, a "mutual withdrawal of claims"? His claims were dismissed by the judge. He can't refile most of them and the ones he can refile, he has yet to produce allegations with a legal basis and there's no indication he is able to. Why would Lively agree to a mutual withdrawal of claims when she is the only one with valid claims still pending?

Y'all are delusional.

She has to now bring sufficient evidence of SH and retaliation to win over a jury. You think her chances are good?

DP. Not sure if you are a lawyer and understand that her only monetary risk in these claims at jury trial are attorneys fees. He will not win damages off her claims. Just in case that wasn’t clear, because you seem to be suggesting that he shouldn’t pay her. Her claims, especially her retaliation claims, could be worth quite a bit of money. So your response seems again to not really be accepting reality.

It’s not about just money. This is also reputation for both sides.

If she goes to trial and loses, he’s vindicated. If she wins, she’s vindicated. The risk is there for both sides because juries are unknown factors.

So she has to weigh the risk of a jury trial, media headlines, and potentially losing.

Are you a lawyer and do you think her case is a slam dunk?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Two more apparent Baldoni supporters only seeing attorneys (apparently) urging Lively to take this win and settle to make this case go away.

What does settling mean anymore? Wayfarer has no claims against Lively right now (with a few they can amend but they actually have to do that work). If Lively settles, wouldn't that mean Wayfarer paying her?

DP. They do have some options in that they can re plead. And of course appeal. I don’t see why they wouldn’t re file unless both sides can agree to try to settle. I can’t see wayfarer paying BL. Why would they? But I can see a world where Baldoni is willing to drop his claims and any appeals in exchange for a mutual withdrawal of claims and some sort of concerted PR statement.

That is almost always the better way to go.

Lol, a "mutual withdrawal of claims"? His claims were dismissed by the judge. He can't refile most of them and the ones he can refile, he has yet to produce allegations with a legal basis and there's no indication he is able to. Why would Lively agree to a mutual withdrawal of claims when she is the only one with valid claims still pending?

Y'all are delusional.

She has to now bring sufficient evidence of SH and retaliation to win over a jury. You think her chances are good?

DP. Not sure if you are a lawyer and understand that her only monetary risk in these claims at jury trial are attorneys fees. He will not win damages off her claims. Just in case that wasn’t clear, because you seem to be suggesting that he shouldn’t pay her. Her claims, especially her retaliation claims, could be worth quite a bit of money. So your response seems again to not really be accepting reality.

He won’t personally pay her anything, Wayfarer’s insurance might.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OJ was found not guilty too...

No one was found "not guilty" today. The judge ruled that even if Baldoni persuaded a jury that everything he was saying in his complaint was true, he would still not have proven a claim for which he could recover damages. He had no legal basis for his claims. So this would be like instead of charging OJ with murder, the prosecutor tried to charge him with embezzling from the German Chancellor, and the judge was like "uh, what? get out of my court."