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]Judge Liman has ruled on the motion to compel.

Granted as to all requests except tax documents; these have to be submitted by May 28th at the latest.

Denied without prejudice as to the tax and financial documents, so Lively's side can resubmit those requests but presumably have to narrow or do a better job of showing relevancy.

I'd say this is a mixed bag result. He's granted the motion for the most part and given a firm deadline for Wayfarer (though Wayfarer has shown a broad willingness to ignore discovery deadlines thus far). Denying the MTC as to the financial docs is major blow, IMO, but denying it without prejudice lessens it. They are still early in discovery and I assume Lively's lawyers asked for a lot in the first pass and will now narrow and see what they can get.

I do look forward to both sides claiming this is an unequivocal win for either side. I think like most of Liman's rulings, it's right down the middle. I think that's his m.o. for the entire discovery process -- he knows scrutiny of his rulings here is unusually intense and that supporters of both sides are looking both for evidence their side is "winning" and looking for reasons to blast the court for being biased toward the other side. I think he's making extra effort to kind of split the baby in order not to play into that dynamic, while still moving discovery along and keeping lawyers on both sides honest in terms of producing and not over-reaching with requests.[/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