Anonymous wrote:So Wallace has filed for a protective order from Lively's request for his client list from 2023 to now (!!!). Wallace has offered a breakdown of the types of clients, but not their names, and i think even that is too generous. I don't buy his "I'm just a country bumpkin from rural Texas helping families with substance abuse issues" but that request is way too broad. IMO the most she should be able to get is any clients or work spotlighted in his pitch to TAG, essentially anyone discussed by him with any of the Wayfarer parties, only limited as to what they were told by Wallace about those clients. I'd be shocked if Liman didn't rule against Lively here.

Motion
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.380.0.pdf

Email chain https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.380.1.pdf

I thought that is what the AOC PO is for. Not sure Lively will get all of this, but I think it will be more that PP above is suggesting. I think this is this is why they (at Lively's insistence) created a category that is for attorneys eyes only.

So Wallace has filed for a protective order from Lively's request for his client list from 2023 to now (!!!). Wallace has offered a breakdown of the types of clients, but not their names, and i think even that is too generous. I don't buy his "I'm just a country bumpkin from rural Texas helping families with substance abuse issues" but that request is way too broad. IMO the most she should be able to get is any clients or work spotlighted in his pitch to TAG, essentially anyone discussed by him with any of the Wayfarer parties, only limited as to what they were told by Wallace about those clients. I'd be shocked if Liman didn't rule against Lively here.

Motion
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.380.0.pdf

Email chain https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.380.1.pdf

Do you guys still think this goes all the way to trial?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question: Could Blake subpoena commenters on social media? Like say there's someone making mean comments on Insta or Tiktok, or any of the users on r/teamjustinbaldoni.

It wouldn't be worth the effort of tracking them down.

I'm getting worried because they do seem desperate enough.

The extent of the fishing expedition tells me they are still flailing on fleshing out the "traceless smear campaign."

Anonymous wrote:Serious question: Could Blake subpoena commenters on social media? Like say there's someone making mean comments on Insta or Tiktok, or any of the users on r/teamjustinbaldoni.

It wouldn't be worth the effort of tracking them down.

Serious question: Could Blake subpoena commenters on social media? Like say there's someone making mean comments on Insta or Tiktok, or any of the users on r/teamjustinbaldoni.

Blake is so crazy.

Anonymous wrote:Blake has now subpoenaed Perez Hilton and Candace Owens. Which makes me think they’ve been broadcasting accurate info.

That is a hilarious take on this but totally on brand. Lively is trying to figure out which content providers got paid or reimbursed in some way, and what sort of communications they had with Freedman who was inciting their videos. If anything, this is a signal that the content these people were providing was NOT accurate, because Lively is complaining that Freedman is contributing to the dissemination of inaccurate information about Lively. Gottlieb is trying to show that Freedman fed inflammatory and inaccurate information about Lively to Owels, Hilton, and Kelly and that they turned around and shared that bad info with their viewers.

All in all, very on brand for bullying liar Bryan Freedman, also.

Also popcorn planet guy. I wonder if they have representation or if they will use Freedman like some Wayfarer employees.

https://www.tmz.com/2025/07/01/perez-hilton-candace-owens-subpoenaed-lively-baldoni-case/

Blake has now subpoenaed Perez Hilton and Candace Owens. Which makes me think they’ve been broadcasting accurate info.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So reddit is atwitter with Vanzan filing their biennial statement for the first time today.

Trying to link only to direct sources:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GuuU8jUboAEFD37?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GuuU_NEWIAAmqfh?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

Ryan is the CEO.

Oh myyyyyy.

Team Baldoni but don’t understand what’s going on. Something about the CA Vanzan vs the NY Vanzan and not being in good standing. Anyone know what they’re up to with this latest move? Is it something simple like just trying to clean up their paperwork now that they’re getting more scrutiny or is there some benefit to Ryan replacing Blake as ceo? Blake’s supporters have been saying Vanzan is her alter ego but that doesn’t track if Ryan is CEO.

I suspect it's them drawing attention to it unnecessarily by trying to "fix" things the same way they tried to "fix" the leak with the scammy subpoena. Discovery is going to show the corporate structure at the time of the suit. I don't think it makes it look any better to have Ryan as CEO, maybe the opposite. I defend Blake often enough, but not on this issue. We have no information on any business dealings Vanzan would have that would involve breach of contract that would require Jen Abel's phone (while somehow having no idea that she, Wayfarer, and Baldoni were the potential defendants!). That doesn't change for me whether Blake or Ryan is in charge of Vanzan. It seems that Blake and Ryan want to be treated as one entity only when it is convenient.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So reddit is atwitter with Vanzan filing their biennial statement for the first time today.

Trying to link only to direct sources:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GuuU8jUboAEFD37?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GuuU_NEWIAAmqfh?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

Ryan is the CEO.

Oh myyyyyy.

Team Baldoni but don’t understand what’s going on. Something about the CA Vanzan vs the NY Vanzan and not being in good standing. Anyone know what they’re up to with this latest move? Is it something simple like just trying to clean up their paperwork now that they’re getting more scrutiny or is there some benefit to Ryan replacing Blake as ceo? Blake’s supporters have been saying Vanzan is her alter ego but that doesn’t track if Ryan is CEO.

Anonymous wrote:So reddit is atwitter with Vanzan filing their biennial statement for the first time today.

Trying to link only to direct sources:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GuuU8jUboAEFD37?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GuuU_NEWIAAmqfh?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

Ryan is the CEO.

Oh myyyyyy.

So reddit is atwitter with Vanzan filing their biennial statement for the first time today.

Trying to link only to direct sources:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GuuU8jUboAEFD37?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GuuU_NEWIAAmqfh?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

Ryan is the CEO.