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]Lively's lawyers have not said they will recover millions in fees based on this motion. I don't know what their fees are, at some point they'll submit them to the court. We'll see.

What they have said is that in the decision Liman has outlined an avenue for Lively to pursue the damages he did not grant (because he can't grant damages without fact finding and there is no avenue to find fact in this case anymore). Liman has suggested Lively could pursue the damages portion of the 47.1 claim in CA court via and anti-SLAPP or similar motion, and her lawyers have suggested they intend to do that.

I have no idea if this would actually work or not, I'm just clarifying what her lawyers have actually said on the matter. They didn't suggest that they will be awarded millions in attorney's fees based on this motion, they haven't mentioned any numbers with regards to attorney's fees yet at all.[/quote]

That’s actually not what they said. They vaguely stated: “Thankfully, there’s a law against that, and the Court applied it today. People who do nothing wrong don’t have to pay millions of dollars, which is where this is headed now,” the statement concluded.”

This is intentionally misleading. [/quote]

Yes but they also said this:

"Blake Lively won her motion under Civil Code Section 47.1,” Lively’s lawyers Esra Hudson and Michael Gottlieb told Deadline. “Today’s ruling makes it clear that Ms. Lively brought her claims in good faith, that there was no evidence she acted with malice, and that she is the prevailing defendant under Section 47.1.”

They added: “The Court is awarding Ms. Lively attorneys’ fees and costs and has explained that a prevailing defendant under Section 47.1 may seek damages using different procedural mechanisms. The parties’ settlement agreement expressly preserves Ms. Lively’s rights to obtain those damages. Ms. Lively is gratified that her lawsuit shows how Section 47.1 and laws like it create a path for survivors to hold accountable those who weaponize online attacks and retaliatory lawsuits to intimidate and silence survivors.”[/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