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]How does this actually help Lively?  I thought Lively wanted to hold fast to tomorrow' dep so that Baldoni's team would have to scramble to get the dep together after they had barely two weeks to review all the docs.  Garofalo wanted to postpone it and Gottlieb threatened sanctions so I don't think Gottlieb wanted this, honestly.

Is it purely that Wallace wouldn't be able to join the dep if he were no longer a party, and then if he were back to being a party two weeks from now, he'd get to depose her again briefly, for, like, an hour?  I almost think it would have been better to proceed with the dep by Wayfarer and have Wallace do a separate add on later if needed, for an hour.

If this were me, I'd just want to get it over with, but ymmv.[/quote]

This. I don't think Lively wanted to postpone. But if they did the depo tomorrow without Wallace, she'd have to be re-deposed later if they refile against Wallace. So they were looking for a way to get Wallace back in the case just to facilitate him coming to the depo (either filing a "dummy" complaint they would amend later or Liman temporarily vacating his dismissal just for the depo).

But they would need Wayfarer to agree to that, and they wouldn't, so the deposition is postponed because that was the only option they could get everyone to agree to.

The people who think this is a win for Lively or represents bias toward Lively by Liman don't actually understand what happened.[/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