Reply to Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]haha, Judge Liman denied Wallace's request for a protective order over the identity of his clients, saying that's what the protective order was for.  Which I said in here pages ago, but Baldoni supporters laughed at me.  lolol.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.390.0.pdf[/quote]

This seems weird. Can a nonbiased lawyer in here weigh in on whether this decision is unusual? I don't know why he should have to give up the names of his clients. [/quote]

Liman's order, which was linked, explains it.  Evidence does not need to be admissible at trial to be pursued in discovery, and if Jed Wallace has run smear campaigns on behalf of other clients, it makes it more likely that Wallace has run a smear campaign here.  Wallace not naming names of clients at his dep would foreclose from Lively the opportunity to test the available data/information/social media campaign materials on the names and campaigns run for/against other clients, to see what activities that crossed over with Lively's were similar and whether that amounted to a smear.  Lively couldn't check out available info on the Internet to compare with Lively's if Wallace didn't name names. There would be nothing to trace or connect.

I guess you consider me biased, though.  *shrug*[/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