Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
It's highly unusual for the judge to take the decision of whether something is sexual harassment or not away from the fact finder, so striking that he did so repeatedly here. With respect to your middle paragraph, all he is saying is those allegations would have been sufficient to make it to a jury assuming that they occurred as described by Blake: Viewed in the light most favorable to Lively, there is also sufficient evidence that it was reasonable for her to believe that the Wayfarer Parties sexually harassed her by creating a hostile work environment. In analyzing this issue, t[b]he Court need not, and does not, determine whether the relevant conduct rose to the level of sexual harassment[i]. See Yanowitz, 116 P.3d at 1131–32. The birthing scene, how common the use of the word "sexy" was on set, and the interaction between her and Jamie Heath are all allegations where there are sufficient differences between the parties as to what occurred -- how undressed was Blake in the birthing scene, was the word sexy used by men and women (including Blake and Jenny) on set, and pretty much everything about the trailer interaction are all things we have argued about a lot. But the judge is only looking at Blake's version when evaluating whether it is a "reasonable belief" sufficient to make it to a jury. |
Anonymous
|
Some relevant excerpts from the retaliation portion of the opinion:
The Wayfarer Parties argue that they took no adverse employment action against Lively and that their actions were instead reasonably intended to protect themselves and their reputations from unfair and false attacks. Dkt. No. 955 at 27–31. Lively responds that they engaged in a coordinated attempt to attack her character and destroy her reputation in ways extending beyond mere “reasonable defensive measures.” Dkt. No. 1064 at 45–57. At this stage, the Court need not, and may not, pass on whose account is more credible. See Frost v. N.Y.C. Police Dep’t, 980 F.3d 231, 242 (2d Cir. 2020). The question is whether Lively has provided more than a mere “scintilla” of evidence[i] to support her claim such that a reasonable jury viewing the evidence in her favor could find that the Wayfarer Parties took adverse employment action against her because of her protected activities. See Havey v. Homebound Mortg., Inc., 547 F.3d 158, 163 (2d Cir. 2008) (quoting Anderson, 477 U.S. at 252). The evidence here, viewed favorably to Lively, passes this test. . . . . In sum, the parties fiercely dispute the extent to which the backlash against Lively was “organic” or “artificial,” and which steps the Wayfarer Parties may have taken to protect themselves (versus which ones they may have taken to destroy Lively personally and her career). A jury can and should decide those questions. . . . . To be sure, a jury could also find that something other than retaliation explains the actions of the Wayfarer Parties. As they argue, they “had a legitimate interest in protecting their reputations and the reception of their film” against negative press and would have taken steps to do so regardless of Lively’s protected activity. See Dkt. No. 955 at 32 |
Anonymous
| 10 out of 13 accusations were tossed and yet, her supporters (most likely graduates of trump University law school) were adamant about the purported merits of her case. The Internet is the best thing that ever happened to village idiots |
Anonymous
That's what I said, that they could form a reasonable basis for SH, not that they satisfy the standard for SH. It could be interesting to see how the parties will argue about jury instructions and such on this topic. |
Anonymous
3 > 0 |
Anonymous
I simply disagree with the judge's determination here. But sexual harassment claims are always incredibly hard to prove, particularly in hostile work environment cases. I am not shocked, I am disappointed. |
Anonymous
| Case dismissed! |
Anonymous
I have no idea what this thread is about but agree 20 somethings are too young for romance movies. What I do watch is dating game shows and they are much much more interesting when the people are 30 than 20. |
Anonymous
Good. What a complete joke. |
Anonymous
| Blake didn’t like Justin. This was never about SH. Here’s how you know that’s true. Blake made Justin the center of her dispute in her NYT article, in her initial complaint, and even at the all hands meeting (remember she said Jamie can come if he wants). And yet the judge explicitly said that most of the claims involving Justin could not rise to harassment even if viewed in the light most favorable to Blake. The borderline stuff was pretty much all Jamie. Blake’s lawyers clocked this late in the game and made a hard pivot to focusing their legal case on Jamie. Yet Blake’s focus from the beginning was Justin. If this were about SH this would’ve been Blake vs Jamie. And yet Jamie was always a side character. |
Anonymous
|
What stands out to me over and over again was one of the Sony executives, who definitely seem to be more on Blake’s side, saying at one point during the filming of the movie “there is no process that would work with Blake.”
Truer words were never written. From the start, she was full of rage and practically obsessed with Justin before they even started filming. She was having Taylor set him up and they were calling him a clown and a doofus when they’ve only had a couple meetings. And then she couldn’t let it go. The next communication that really stands out to me that I can’t get out of my mind is Taylor in December 2024 basically telling her gently as a friend, you’ve become obsessed with this and yes it’s created distance between us. What I find so sad is that her youngest child is 3 1/2 - his entire life Blake has been completely consumed with this - it literally has become an obsession and has cost her friendships and her career and all for what? |
Anonymous
Why do you think Blake was so determined to hate him? I think it was the weight thing. |
Anonymous
. It seems like she started before then even. It’s possible Ryan felt threatened after that first meeting and they just started snowballing off each other. But it also seems like they planned to take over using Reynolds Deadpool play book. If you look into the origin of that, he totally took over the franchise from the director and pushed him out. I think they were implementing a similar playbook. I’m not saying they planned every move meticulously. I think the overall approach to the film before they even met Justin was that these are small players and we can walk all over them. They created an environment where Justin could not do anything right. Add to that, Blake was clearly upset with her postpartum body and was feeling deeply insecure, and I’m sure that didn’t help things. |
Anonymous
The weight thing and Ryan's ego |
Anonymous
| lol this ended up exactly as I predicted at the beginning - harassment claims dismissed but retaliation going to the fact finder. |