Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now this interesting. Someone has been following the case enough to 'ta-dah', drum up support for a docuseries that follows the background of the case:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/blake-lively-justin-baldoni-docuseries-discovery-1236176436/

Are you suggesting that someone involved in that project is posting here in this mostly DMV mom weblog? Because, again, that type of paranoia is insane and delusional.

Dp, but there is a Blake supporter who repeatedly has claimed that JB pays for bots to vote posts up or down on reddit. Not sure either side has cornered market on delusion.

Please link one, because I have been here since the beginning of this thread and I don’t remember this, unless you are talking about the smear allegations in the complaint itself, or the trend noted by multiple people that Reddit posts mentioning Jed Wallace or Bryan Freedman get 10-15 downvotes (but no one claims Baldoni is doing this). Whereas the accusations from Team Baldoni of bots, paid commenting, and even claims that Lively and Reynolds themselves are posting here (see eg the website feedback thread) are annoyingly constant.

So yes, team Baldoni is more delulu. Sorry not sorry.

Omg, please look in the mirror. The lack of self awareness is quite something.

[Anonymous]

Bots—ha!

The stories are everywhere today.

Here is another…

https://www.sportskeeda.com/us/podcasts/news-you-helen-keller-see-bs-melanie-king-reacts-blake-lively-s-alleged-straw-lawsuit-vanzan-inc-surfaces

[Anonymous]

Reading that there may be subpoenas for TS and HJ this week. Could be conjecture, but I wonder if these two, then what about Coop & Gigi?

[Anonymous]

Who are HJ, Coop, and Gigi?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reading that there may be subpoenas for TS and HJ this week. Could be conjecture, but I wonder if these two, then what about Coop & Gigi?

Why would they subpoena these people? What relevant info about the facts being litigated could they offer.

TS and HJ won't be subpoenaed either, because there's no evidence they have relevant documents. TS *might* be asked to do a third-party interrogatory regarding her interaction with JB, but that's it.

Also if Lively's communications with TS reference JB or IEWU, it's possible that will be requested via discovery, but that will happen through Lively, not through TS. If JB tries to subpoena TS's text records, they'll get a big fat "nice try -- no" from TS's lawyers because she's not a party to the case and they haven't shown her communications are relevant.

HJ will not be involved in discovery at all unless something else comes to light. Right now, what does he have to do with this case? Nothing, that's what.

Some of you seem to think this is some kind of kangaroo court with he goal of exposing and embarrassing famous people for sport. That's a fantasy. They are going to wind up deposing Sony producers, the makeup artists, Lively's driver and assistant, etc. People who were actually on set or involved in the film or marketing. Not Hugh Jackman, who showed up to a couple promotional events and smiled for cameras and that's it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who are HJ, Coop, and Gigi?

Hugh Jackman, Bradley Cooper, and Gigi Hadid -- three friends of Blake's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading that there may be subpoenas for TS and HJ this week. Could be conjecture, but I wonder if these two, then what about Coop & Gigi?

Why would they subpoena these people? What relevant info about the facts being litigated could they offer.

TS and HJ won't be subpoenaed either, because there's no evidence they have relevant documents. TS *might* be asked to do a third-party interrogatory regarding her interaction with JB, but that's it.

Also if Lively's communications with TS reference JB or IEWU, it's possible that will be requested via discovery, but that will happen through Lively, not through TS. If JB tries to subpoena TS's text records, they'll get a big fat "nice try -- no" from TS's lawyers because she's not a party to the case and they haven't shown her communications are relevant.

HJ will not be involved in discovery at all unless something else comes to light. Right now, what does he have to do with this case? Nothing, that's what.

Some of you seem to think this is some kind of kangaroo court with he goal of exposing and embarrassing famous people for sport. That's a fantasy. They are going to wind up deposing Sony producers, the makeup artists, Lively's driver and assistant, etc. People who were actually on set or involved in the film or marketing. Not Hugh Jackman, who showed up to a couple promotional events and smiled for cameras and that's it.

Happens all the time. Candace Owens received a subpoena for her texts with Kanye for a case she’s not involved in. But yeah, I’m sure TS will move to quash. Just as JB would have in subpoenagate had Lively’s team played by the rules…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading that there may be subpoenas for TS and HJ this week. Could be conjecture, but I wonder if these two, then what about Coop & Gigi?

Why would they subpoena these people? What relevant info about the facts being litigated could they offer.

TS and HJ won't be subpoenaed either, because there's no evidence they have relevant documents. TS *might* be asked to do a third-party interrogatory regarding her interaction with JB, but that's it.

Also if Lively's communications with TS reference JB or IEWU, it's possible that will be requested via discovery, but that will happen through Lively, not through TS. If JB tries to subpoena TS's text records, they'll get a big fat "nice try -- no" from TS's lawyers because she's not a party to the case and they haven't shown her communications are relevant.

HJ will not be involved in discovery at all unless something else comes to light. Right now, what does he have to do with this case? Nothing, that's what.

Some of you seem to think this is some kind of kangaroo court with he goal of exposing and embarrassing famous people for sport. That's a fantasy. They are going to wind up deposing Sony producers, the makeup artists, Lively's driver and assistant, etc. People who were actually on set or involved in the film or marketing. Not Hugh Jackman, who showed up to a couple promotional events and smiled for cameras and that's it.

Happens all the time. Candace Owens received a subpoena for her texts with Kanye for a case she’s not involved in. But yeah, I’m sure TS will move to quash. Just as JB would have in subpoenagate had Lively’s team played by the rules…

PP again, and not so fast on HJ. He was involved in the premiere and promotion of the movie—remember they were trying to copy Barbie/oppenheimer? I think he’ll be subpoenaed (again, I’m sure he’ll fight it) and deposed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are HJ, Coop, and Gigi?

Hugh Jackman, Bradley Cooper, and Gigi Hadid -- three friends of Blake's.

Ah, yeah they're not going to be involved. Swift, maybe on the extortion issue, but I wouldn't be surprised if those claims are dismissed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading that there may be subpoenas for TS and HJ this week. Could be conjecture, but I wonder if these two, then what about Coop & Gigi?

Why would they subpoena these people? What relevant info about the facts being litigated could they offer.

TS and HJ won't be subpoenaed either, because there's no evidence they have relevant documents. TS *might* be asked to do a third-party interrogatory regarding her interaction with JB, but that's it.

Also if Lively's communications with TS reference JB or IEWU, it's possible that will be requested via discovery, but that will happen through Lively, not through TS. If JB tries to subpoena TS's text records, they'll get a big fat "nice try -- no" from TS's lawyers because she's not a party to the case and they haven't shown her communications are relevant.

HJ will not be involved in discovery at all unless something else comes to light. Right now, what does he have to do with this case? Nothing, that's what.

Some of you seem to think this is some kind of kangaroo court with he goal of exposing and embarrassing famous people for sport. That's a fantasy. They are going to wind up deposing Sony producers, the makeup artists, Lively's driver and assistant, etc. People who were actually on set or involved in the film or marketing. Not Hugh Jackman, who showed up to a couple promotional events and smiled for cameras and that's it.

Happens all the time. Candace Owens received a subpoena for her texts with Kanye for a case she’s not involved in. But yeah, I’m sure TS will move to quash. Just as JB would have in subpoenagate had Lively’s team played by the rules…

PP again, and not so fast on HJ. He was involved in the premiere and promotion of the movie—remember they were trying to copy Barbie/oppenheimer? I think he’ll be subpoenaed (again, I’m sure he’ll fight it) and deposed.

What information would Wayfarer seek from Jackman?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading that there may be subpoenas for TS and HJ this week. Could be conjecture, but I wonder if these two, then what about Coop & Gigi?

Why would they subpoena these people? What relevant info about the facts being litigated could they offer.

TS and HJ won't be subpoenaed either, because there's no evidence they have relevant documents. TS *might* be asked to do a third-party interrogatory regarding her interaction with JB, but that's it.

Also if Lively's communications with TS reference JB or IEWU, it's possible that will be requested via discovery, but that will happen through Lively, not through TS. If JB tries to subpoena TS's text records, they'll get a big fat "nice try -- no" from TS's lawyers because she's not a party to the case and they haven't shown her communications are relevant.

HJ will not be involved in discovery at all unless something else comes to light. Right now, what does he have to do with this case? Nothing, that's what.

Some of you seem to think this is some kind of kangaroo court with he goal of exposing and embarrassing famous people for sport. That's a fantasy. They are going to wind up deposing Sony producers, the makeup artists, Lively's driver and assistant, etc. People who were actually on set or involved in the film or marketing. Not Hugh Jackman, who showed up to a couple promotional events and smiled for cameras and that's it.

Happens all the time. Candace Owens received a subpoena for her texts with Kanye for a case she’s not involved in. But yeah, I’m sure TS will move to quash. Just as JB would have in subpoenagate had Lively’s team played by the rules…

PP again, and not so fast on HJ. He was involved in the premiere and promotion of the movie—remember they were trying to copy Barbie/oppenheimer? I think he’ll be subpoenaed (again, I’m sure he’ll fight it) and deposed.

What information would Wayfarer seek from Jackman?

Well for starters, the alleged predator defamation happened at the Deadpool wolverine premiere. I assume they’ll want to know if he was a witness to any of those conversations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now this interesting. Someone has been following the case enough to 'ta-dah', drum up support for a docuseries that follows the background of the case:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/blake-lively-justin-baldoni-docuseries-discovery-1236176436/

Are you suggesting that someone involved in that project is posting here in this mostly DMV mom weblog? Because, again, that type of paranoia is insane and delusional.

Dp, but there is a Blake supporter who repeatedly has claimed that JB pays for bots to vote posts up or down on reddit. Not sure either side has cornered market on delusion.

Please link one, because I have been here since the beginning of this thread and I don’t remember this, unless you are talking about the smear allegations in the complaint itself, or the trend noted by multiple people that Reddit posts mentioning Jed Wallace or Bryan Freedman get 10-15 downvotes (but no one claims Baldoni is doing this). Whereas the accusations from Team Baldoni of bots, paid commenting, and even claims that Lively and Reynolds themselves are posting here (see eg the website feedback thread) are annoyingly constant.

So yes, team Baldoni is more delulu. Sorry not sorry.

Omg, please look in the mirror. The lack of self awareness is quite something.

Can’t link one I guess. 👌

[Anonymous]

I have been trying to understand what is up with the subpoena and have sometimes been following the comments of a California lawyer on Reddit (Kat Ortega - not her real name). Team Baldoni won't want this, as she posts a lot on the pro-Lively site BaldoniFiles, but I find her comments to deal almost exclusively with the legal issues (which most interest me), with California law specifically, and to be extremely informed, technical, and thoughtful.

FWIW, here's a link to her comments specifically, though they will make most sense in context within a thread. https://www.reddit.com/user/KatOrtega118/

Regarding the subpoena, I think she thinks that it probably won't have that much of an effect on the case because the parties are entitled to receive these materials in discovery anyway, and that California specifically allows John Doe complaints in cases involving defamation from the internet etc. I think she thinks there is some small possibility that there could be an issue if some duty of confidentiality was owed from Jones to Wayfarer, but she has actually analyzed the Wayfarer contract with Jones and thinks no such duty exists from that. She also thinks Freedman will need to raise this soon (like this week) if he is going to raise it, though I think also suggested a small chance he might hold it til the amended complaint.

She gives Freedman more credit than I do, generally, which is disappointing, but I still find her comments extremely informative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have been trying to understand what is up with the subpoena and have sometimes been following the comments of a California lawyer on Reddit (Kat Ortega - not her real name). Team Baldoni won't want this, as she posts a lot on the pro-Lively site BaldoniFiles, but I find her comments to deal almost exclusively with the legal issues (which most interest me), with California law specifically, and to be extremely informed, technical, and thoughtful.

FWIW, here's a link to her comments specifically, though they will make most sense in context within a thread. https://www.reddit.com/user/KatOrtega118/

Regarding the subpoena, I think she thinks that it probably won't have that much of an effect on the case because the parties are entitled to receive these materials in discovery anyway, and that California specifically allows John Doe complaints in cases involving defamation from the internet etc. I think she thinks there is some small possibility that there could be an issue if some duty of confidentiality was owed from Jones to Wayfarer, but she has actually analyzed the Wayfarer contract with Jones and thinks no such duty exists from that. She also thinks Freedman will need to raise this soon (like this week) if he is going to raise it, though I think also suggested a small chance he might hold it til the amended complaint.

She gives Freedman more credit than I do, generally, which is disappointing, but I still find her comments extremely informative.

I like Kat Ortega too! She's smart and because she currently practices in California and has a background in employment/harassment law, she tends to be much more insightful than a lot of the legal commentators who don't know CA law, have no experience with the legal issues at play, or may not even practice at all anymore and just be looking for clicks.

Also, I believe the reason she gives BF quite a bit of credit is that she's very familiar with his work. Like knows his reputation and has followed many other cases he's been involved with. I find her commentary on BF very useful because she's good at explaining the strategy behind what BF does (which, as a lawyer but not a litigator and definitely not this kind of litigator) often confuses me or looks sloppy.

Anyway, at least one DP appreciates the link and discussion. Would love to see more from her on this thread because I think she has insightful things to say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have been trying to understand what is up with the subpoena and have sometimes been following the comments of a California lawyer on Reddit (Kat Ortega - not her real name). Team Baldoni won't want this, as she posts a lot on the pro-Lively site BaldoniFiles, but I find her comments to deal almost exclusively with the legal issues (which most interest me), with California law specifically, and to be extremely informed, technical, and thoughtful.

FWIW, here's a link to her comments specifically, though they will make most sense in context within a thread. https://www.reddit.com/user/KatOrtega118/

Regarding the subpoena, I think she thinks that it probably won't have that much of an effect on the case because the parties are entitled to receive these materials in discovery anyway, and that California specifically allows John Doe complaints in cases involving defamation from the internet etc. I think she thinks there is some small possibility that there could be an issue if some duty of confidentiality was owed from Jones to Wayfarer, but she has actually analyzed the Wayfarer contract with Jones and thinks no such duty exists from that. She also thinks Freedman will need to raise this soon (like this week) if he is going to raise it, though I think also suggested a small chance he might hold it til the amended complaint.

She gives Freedman more credit than I do, generally, which is disappointing, but I still find her comments extremely informative.

There are potential issues in the associated cases, particularly Jones/Abel and failure to provide notice to Abel as a CA based employee. Also discussed quite a bit via Reddit and TikTok