Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Entertainment and Pop Culture
Reply to "Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims "
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous]Nothing is going to come of the Vanzan subpoena in the Lively case. Some chance Jones gets hit with something by Abel (employment issue) or Wayfarer (contract issue) for complying with the subpoena without giving notice to either of them. But even if the Vanzan subpoena is ruled to be improper, it will have no impact on the Lively litigation because everything they received via the Vanzan subpoena is now discoverable in Lively v. Baldoni et al. I put the odds of Liman punishing Lively or her lawyers for the subpoena at 0%, and the odds of him disallowing any of the evidence discovered as a result of the subpoena at less than 0%, this will never happen. The persistent claims by Baldoni supporters that the Vanzan subpoena is somehow going o help Baldoni/Wayfarer escape from Lively's lawsuit is bizarre. This is just not a legally defensible position. If any of your TikTok lawyers are saying this, you should stop following them. It's bad analysis.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
