Anonymous wrote:Ah the Baldoni babes at it again. Neither won here, but the joint statement effectively acknowledged her concerns:
"We acknowledge the process presented challenges and recognize concerns raised by Ms. Lively deserved to be heard. We remain firmly committed to workplaces free of improprieties and unproductive environments," continued the joint statement. "It is our sincere hope that this brings closure and allows all involved to move forward constructively and in peace, including a respectful environment online."
Wayfarer was scared, after the judge allowed the rataliation allegation to go forward. "However, Liman allowed Lively to continue pursuing claims related to an alleged retaliatory smear campaign, stating that the actions of Baldoni's PR team “at least arguably crossed the line.” He added that the reputational impact could be significant, emphasizing that Lively's profession “places a heavy emphasis on personal and professional marketability.”"
What it came down to is that, given the reputational damage on both sides, it was in no one's best interest to go to trial.
Agree that the statement issued by both party's lawyers makes it seem like she "won." If Wayfarer thought they'd win, they would not have made that concession. My guess is nothing monetary, just the statement.