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]Case and Koslow continue to produce amazing hijinks in this litigation.

New MTCs from Gottlieb seek to compel Case and Koslow to produce documents they put on their privilege log which Gottlieb argues are not really priv.

First of all, Case and Koslow both inadvertently produced many of her privileged documents in her document production, which the Lively attorneys discovered, and so stopped reading and reviewing the production on the same day in order to inform Case and Koslow, who re-produced and clawed back documents as privileged.

The docs on Case's log now include docs going back to August 2024, with Freedman, and also documents between Case and her father, and attorney, dating back to August 2024 (where it appears Case was discussing more then her own potential liability).

Case MTC:  https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.585.0.pdf

Koslow MTC:  https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.586.0.pdf

Roeser declaration:  https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.587.0.pdf[/quote]

This looks like it could become a really big deal. Jed Wallace is on a lot of the communications in question too, which is both interesting in its own right (given the degree to which JW has downplayed what he did for Wayfarer) and could also break privilege and result in these communications becoming evidence, as he was not represented by the attorneys in question.[/quote]

The documents with Wallace are all after 12/20, the date the lawsuit was filed.  So, again, they are moving the entire smear issue to after the Complaint.  More importantly, for purposes of this motion, it has already been  asserted that Wallace was involved in developing the WF defense and counter claims, so these documents would likely be protected by Attorney work product even if he was not represented himself by Freedman et al.   I think at least the Wallace documents will be protected by a privilege, and I don’t care enough to look at the rest.[/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