Reply to Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Auto deleting messages before litigation is filed can still lead to a spoliation finding: https://www.gtlaw-ediscoverywatch.com/2024/11/text-message-spoliation-auto-delete-setting-may-lead-to-legal-sanctions/

I do think Wallace may open himself up to a ruling like this, if they are able to keep him in the NY court.

One factor in all of this is whether Wallace "should have known" that the matter could be subject to litigation. That's one reason why it's relevant that Wallace was sent things like a copy of Lively's 17-point list. Having that context means Wallace knew his engagement was related to an underlying employment issue.

Also Wallace was not actually added as a defendant until February, but Lively was trying to depose him even before that, in Texas. If he deleted messages after the NYT article (which would obviously have put him on notice that litigation against him was likely), that is an even more straightforward spoliation argument.

So just a note to anyone reading: setting hour comms to auto delete is actually not a good way to get out of being sued! The best way to avoid being sued is to not engage in activity someone could sue you for.[/quote]

The issue here was auto deletion AFTER the defendant received a cease and desist letter from the plaintiff.  Not a similar fact pattern at all.[/quote]

Again, that's why it's relevant that Wallace appears to have been told that the campaign against Lively stemmed from an underlying employment conflict. Had he been hired without being informed of the nature of the conflict between Wayfarer and Lively, he could plead ignorance if the litigation risk. But he appears to have known.

If you look at the standard the court applied in that case and how they applied it, it's not that hard to see how this court could make a similar finding as to Wallace.[/quote]

It is if you are a thinking person.  This guy was the TARGET of a cease and desist letter, and was sued shortly afterwards.  Further it’s a district court case from Southern Ohio.  [/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