Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

I hereby claim this thread and all its riches for the honor and glory of myself and my descendants.

/s/ Arlington mom

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hereby claim this thread and all its riches for the honor and glory of myself and my descendants.

/s/ Arlington mom

Congratulations Arlington for the 1000th page entry! Since cannot give you fireworks or party, maybe break out your florals and have a signature drink to celebrate tonight.

Hear ye. Hear ye. The triple digits are dead, long live the quadruple digits of this thread!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can’t wait for Liman to deny everything Fritz wants, right before he and Gottlieb spend a weekend afternoon scuba diving and enjoying some lobster rolls.

If he does that then he's gone off the deep end. Fritz is asking to serve her through her attorney, an attorney who has already appeared on her behalf in this case and states she is ready to comply once served with the subpoena. There is literally no justification for Liman to not grant that and sidestep all of the other irrelevant nonsense in Ferrer's filing.

I don't think Ferrer is obligated to accept service through her attorney. Freedman refused to accept service for his WF clients when the wildfires were happening in LA, and actually forced Gottlieb to serve people while their homes were burning, purely for the purpose of Gottlieb do that and so that he could later complain about Gottlieb serving people in person during the wildfires. Which Freedman fully did, actually.

Ferrer is a witness with relevant information who already replied to another subpoena. WF has made attempts to serve her in person. Lively was allowed to serve people via LinkedIn on similar facts. There's no reason for Liman to make WF hire investigators to serve Ferrer when her attorney is right there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can’t wait for Liman to deny everything Fritz wants, right before he and Gottlieb spend a weekend afternoon scuba diving and enjoying some lobster rolls.

If he does that then he's gone off the deep end. Fritz is asking to serve her through her attorney, an attorney who has already appeared on her behalf in this case and states she is ready to comply once served with the subpoena. There is literally no justification for Liman to not grant that and sidestep all of the other irrelevant nonsense in Ferrer's filing.

I don't think Ferrer is obligated to accept service through her attorney. Freedman refused to accept service for his WF clients when the wildfires were happening in LA, and actually forced Gottlieb to serve people while their homes were burning, purely for the purpose of Gottlieb do that and so that he could later complain about Gottlieb serving people in person during the wildfires. Which Freedman fully did, actually.

Ferrer is a witness with relevant information who already replied to another subpoena. WF has made attempts to serve her in person. Lively was allowed to serve people via LinkedIn on similar facts. There's no reason for Liman to make WF hire investigators to serve Ferrer when her attorney is right there.

Liman may love Gottlieb, but I think the total idiocy of filing an opposition to a motion for alternative service, while still refusing to accept service from one party while accepting from the other, will annoy him to no end. Add in the opposition brief wasn’t even on topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can’t wait for Liman to deny everything Fritz wants, right before he and Gottlieb spend a weekend afternoon scuba diving and enjoying some lobster rolls.

If he does that then he's gone off the deep end. Fritz is asking to serve her through her attorney, an attorney who has already appeared on her behalf in this case and states she is ready to comply once served with the subpoena. There is literally no justification for Liman to not grant that and sidestep all of the other irrelevant nonsense in Ferrer's filing.

I don't think Ferrer is obligated to accept service through her attorney. Freedman refused to accept service for his WF clients when the wildfires were happening in LA, and actually forced Gottlieb to serve people while their homes were burning, purely for the purpose of Gottlieb do that and so that he could later complain about Gottlieb serving people in person during the wildfires. Which Freedman fully did, actually.

Ferrer is a witness with relevant information who already replied to another subpoena. WF has made attempts to serve her in person. Lively was allowed to serve people via LinkedIn on similar facts. There's no reason for Liman to make WF hire investigators to serve Ferrer when her attorney is right there.

Liman may love Gottlieb, but I think the total idiocy of filing an opposition to a motion for alternative service, while still refusing to accept service from one party while accepting from the other, will annoy him to no end. Add in the opposition brief wasn’t even on topic.

Yeah, her attorney, who is aware of the subpoena, can't argue that she's not on notice that she's due to be served, and not give a good address, and force WF to try to serve her in person, when her argument is she feels harassed... make it make sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can’t wait for Liman to deny everything Fritz wants, right before he and Gottlieb spend a weekend afternoon scuba diving and enjoying some lobster rolls.

If he does that then he's gone off the deep end. Fritz is asking to serve her through her attorney, an attorney who has already appeared on her behalf in this case and states she is ready to comply once served with the subpoena. There is literally no justification for Liman to not grant that and sidestep all of the other irrelevant nonsense in Ferrer's filing.

I don't think Ferrer is obligated to accept service through her attorney. Freedman refused to accept service for his WF clients when the wildfires were happening in LA, and actually forced Gottlieb to serve people while their homes were burning, purely for the purpose of Gottlieb do that and so that he could later complain about Gottlieb serving people in person during the wildfires. Which Freedman fully did, actually.

Ferrer is a witness with relevant information who already replied to another subpoena. WF has made attempts to serve her in person. Lively was allowed to serve people via LinkedIn on similar facts. There's no reason for Liman to make WF hire investigators to serve Ferrer when her attorney is right there.

Liman may love Gottlieb, but I think the total idiocy of filing an opposition to a motion for alternative service, while still refusing to accept service from one party while accepting from the other, will annoy him to no end. Add in the opposition brief wasn’t even on topic.

I could be wrong, but I don't think Liman will be extra hard on someone for their first filing in this case tbh. It's literally her first filing. And I would argue that Fritz is up to his old PR business again in his response here by quoting Ferrer's text language about Baldoni in the letter (really there is no legal purpose for that in this letter, it's pure PR to feed the content creators grifting off this case). The offer to let Ferrer out of the case altogether and testify/produce for neither WF nor Lively seems to have a legal purpose I guess but also really is PR - WF can't really offer this and it's extremely self-interested of them to do so given the obviously negative tone of Ferrer's letter.

I'm not saying Ferrer's letter is good. Just saying WF's response is still playing PR games which Fritz has been strictly warned about and yet still persists. Fritz has had loads of chances at filing pleadings here and Ferrer is on attempt #1, so I'm not sure Fritz is "winning" here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can’t wait for Liman to deny everything Fritz wants, right before he and Gottlieb spend a weekend afternoon scuba diving and enjoying some lobster rolls.

If he does that then he's gone off the deep end. Fritz is asking to serve her through her attorney, an attorney who has already appeared on her behalf in this case and states she is ready to comply once served with the subpoena. There is literally no justification for Liman to not grant that and sidestep all of the other irrelevant nonsense in Ferrer's filing.

I don't think Ferrer is obligated to accept service through her attorney. Freedman refused to accept service for his WF clients when the wildfires were happening in LA, and actually forced Gottlieb to serve people while their homes were burning, purely for the purpose of Gottlieb do that and so that he could later complain about Gottlieb serving people in person during the wildfires. Which Freedman fully did, actually.

Ferrer is a witness with relevant information who already replied to another subpoena. WF has made attempts to serve her in person. Lively was allowed to serve people via LinkedIn on similar facts. There's no reason for Liman to make WF hire investigators to serve Ferrer when her attorney is right there.

Liman may love Gottlieb, but I think the total idiocy of filing an opposition to a motion for alternative service, while still refusing to accept service from one party while accepting from the other, will annoy him to no end. Add in the opposition brief wasn’t even on topic.

I could be wrong, but I don't think Liman will be extra hard on someone for their first filing in this case tbh. It's literally her first filing. And I would argue that Fritz is up to his old PR business again in his response here by quoting Ferrer's text language about Baldoni in the letter (really there is no legal purpose for that in this letter, it's pure PR to feed the content creators grifting off this case). The offer to let Ferrer out of the case altogether and testify/produce for neither WF nor Lively seems to have a legal purpose I guess but also really is PR - WF can't really offer this and it's extremely self-interested of them to do so given the obviously negative tone of Ferrer's letter.

I'm not saying Ferrer's letter is good. Just saying WF's response is still playing PR games which Fritz has been strictly warned about and yet still persists. Fritz has had loads of chances at filing pleadings here and Ferrer is on attempt #1, so I'm not sure Fritz is "winning" here.

Personally, I don't think Fritz's letter was very good (and considering how bad Ferrer's opposition was, that should have been a slam dunk response, but they go off on weird tangents instead), but Ferrer's argument is still so terrible that it would be unreasonable for Liman not to grant the motion for alternative service. Like, even if Wayfarer didn't respond at all to Ferrer, Ferrer's opposition is so bad (I'm for attorney, she's willing to comply with the subpoena, but haha you have the wrong address so you have to find her in person even though he feels harassed) that he should grant alternative service through her attorney. The purpose of service is for her to be notified of the subpoena. She's now notified. Done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can’t wait for Liman to deny everything Fritz wants, right before he and Gottlieb spend a weekend afternoon scuba diving and enjoying some lobster rolls.

If he does that then he's gone off the deep end. Fritz is asking to serve her through her attorney, an attorney who has already appeared on her behalf in this case and states she is ready to comply once served with the subpoena. There is literally no justification for Liman to not grant that and sidestep all of the other irrelevant nonsense in Ferrer's filing.

I don't think Ferrer is obligated to accept service through her attorney. Freedman refused to accept service for his WF clients when the wildfires were happening in LA, and actually forced Gottlieb to serve people while their homes were burning, purely for the purpose of Gottlieb do that and so that he could later complain about Gottlieb serving people in person during the wildfires. Which Freedman fully did, actually.

Ferrer is a witness with relevant information who already replied to another subpoena. WF has made attempts to serve her in person. Lively was allowed to serve people via LinkedIn on similar facts. There's no reason for Liman to make WF hire investigators to serve Ferrer when her attorney is right there.

Liman may love Gottlieb, but I think the total idiocy of filing an opposition to a motion for alternative service, while still refusing to accept service from one party while accepting from the other, will annoy him to no end. Add in the opposition brief wasn’t even on topic.

I could be wrong, but I don't think Liman will be extra hard on someone for their first filing in this case tbh. It's literally her first filing. And I would argue that Fritz is up to his old PR business again in his response here by quoting Ferrer's text language about Baldoni in the letter (really there is no legal purpose for that in this letter, it's pure PR to feed the content creators grifting off this case). The offer to let Ferrer out of the case altogether and testify/produce for neither WF nor Lively seems to have a legal purpose I guess but also really is PR - WF can't really offer this and it's extremely self-interested of them to do so given the obviously negative tone of Ferrer's letter.

I'm not saying Ferrer's letter is good. Just saying WF's response is still playing PR games which Fritz has been strictly warned about and yet still persists. Fritz has had loads of chances at filing pleadings here and Ferrer is on attempt #1, so I'm not sure Fritz is "winning" here.

Personally, I don't think Fritz's letter was very good (and considering how bad Ferrer's opposition was, that should have been a slam dunk response, but they go off on weird tangents instead), but Ferrer's argument is still so terrible that it would be unreasonable for Liman not to grant the motion for alternative service. Like, even if Wayfarer didn't respond at all to Ferrer, Ferrer's opposition is so bad (I'm for attorney, she's willing to comply with the subpoena, but haha you have the wrong address so you have to find her in person even though he feels harassed) that he should grant alternative service through her attorney. The purpose of service is for her to be notified of the subpoena. She's now notified. Done.

Agree, this is basically a ministerial motion. It was over after they outlined the steps they took to serve her initially. The fact that her attorney has since made an appearance before Liman seals it.