Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Baldoni filed the $400M countersuit in January 2025 and it was tossed in November 2025. 11 months of white shoe attorneys is certainly not a small sum, it's likely several million dollars.

But it wasn’t 11 months of work. Maybe a few weeks to draft and file the motion to dismiss and a few more weeks on preparing for the 47.1 fee hearing. Not millions of dollars and it has to be reasonable fees.

Her lawyers fees will be deemed reasonable even if their rates are high, as long as they are still in line with rates of similar lawyers. She's a celebrity and this was an extremely high profile case, she is entitled to a highly qualified firm. The size of the defamation action will also influence that decision -- if someone filed a $400m defamation claims against you, would you go bargain hunting for lawyers?

It will definitely be more than a few weeks to draft the motion to dismiss. Also we're talking dozens of lawyers here.

They will almost certainly ask for more fees than Limam will grant, but it's not going to be a low number. It won't be 30 million but it's not going to 10k either.

All of her fees will be reviewed for reasonableness and regardless of hourly rate, her team can’t claim it took them 3x the hours to do something like write a motion. Just because she has dozens of lawyers it doesn’t mean she can claim millions in fees and costs.

Again, none of this is money going to her. So she may save some $$$ but she still has to pay the rest of what is surely a large legal bill.

So again, explain how this is a victory?

It's a victory for 47.1. It validates the law. And importantly, it INvalidates Baldoni's sham defamation lawsuit by ensuring he and his friends are on the hook for every penny it cost.

Far from it, Liman clearly felt there was serious Constitutional issues with 47.1. He sidestepped them by not awarding punitive and treble damages on alternative grounds. The fee shifting aspect of 47.1 was never the issue with it. Even so, I don't think Liman's finding regarding lack of malice would have withstood appeal, and I think he knows that. But he really didn't want to be the judge to find 47.1 unconstitutional so he sidestepped it.

You are confiding fees and damages.

He awarded all fees. So yes, Baldoni will have to pay for all costs associated with his meritless defamation claim.

No, Baldoni isn't paying anything, Wayfarer is. And the most they're getting is 300k capped. Literally peanuts in comparison to the 30M baseless suit Lively filed and lost between her dismissed claims and settlement. With their remaining multi-million dollar attorney fees, the $2.1M mechanics lien on their home, Blake Brown hemorrhaging, the new $5M lawsuit with the tesla, and NYC/NY state/and federal taxes, they're bleeding money out of their bootyhole.

Wayfarer is Baldoni's company though. He founded it.

Where does it say fees are capped at 300k?

I’m sure wayfarer/baldoni are completely relieved with this outcome. I think that’s how you know Lively didn’t “win.” She’ll spin it, like she’s spun everything, but if you actually care to understand the details of this case, you know that a few thousand dollars (plus the earlier $0 settlement) is not a big deal when we could have been talking tens of millions.

Baldoni/Wayfarer probably felt like they had to file the defamation suit to get their side of the story heard after the NYT hit piece, and for that they get a (anti)slap on the wrist. Small potatoes for the story they were able to tell. It makes his attorney look pretty astute, playing the long game like that.

And on the positive side, 47.1 did what it was supposed to do by providing some protection from retaliatory lawsuits.

They recently bought that home in London, I thought they were going to go there and lay low for a bit.

What is Baldoni's next move?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Baldoni filed the $400M countersuit in January 2025 and it was tossed in November 2025. 11 months of white shoe attorneys is certainly not a small sum, it's likely several million dollars.

But it wasn’t 11 months of work. Maybe a few weeks to draft and file the motion to dismiss and a few more weeks on preparing for the 47.1 fee hearing. Not millions of dollars and it has to be reasonable fees.

Her lawyers fees will be deemed reasonable even if their rates are high, as long as they are still in line with rates of similar lawyers. She's a celebrity and this was an extremely high profile case, she is entitled to a highly qualified firm. The size of the defamation action will also influence that decision -- if someone filed a $400m defamation claims against you, would you go bargain hunting for lawyers?

It will definitely be more than a few weeks to draft the motion to dismiss. Also we're talking dozens of lawyers here.

They will almost certainly ask for more fees than Limam will grant, but it's not going to be a low number. It won't be 30 million but it's not going to 10k either.

All of her fees will be reviewed for reasonableness and regardless of hourly rate, her team can’t claim it took them 3x the hours to do something like write a motion. Just because she has dozens of lawyers it doesn’t mean she can claim millions in fees and costs.

Again, none of this is money going to her. So she may save some $$$ but she still has to pay the rest of what is surely a large legal bill.

So again, explain how this is a victory?

It's a victory for 47.1. It validates the law. And importantly, it INvalidates Baldoni's sham defamation lawsuit by ensuring he and his friends are on the hook for every penny it cost.

Far from it, Liman clearly felt there was serious Constitutional issues with 47.1. He sidestepped them by not awarding punitive and treble damages on alternative grounds. The fee shifting aspect of 47.1 was never the issue with it. Even so, I don't think Liman's finding regarding lack of malice would have withstood appeal, and I think he knows that. But he really didn't want to be the judge to find 47.1 unconstitutional so he sidestepped it.

You are confiding fees and damages.

He awarded all fees. So yes, Baldoni will have to pay for all costs associated with his meritless defamation claim.

No, Baldoni isn't paying anything, Wayfarer is. And the most they're getting is 300k capped. Literally peanuts in comparison to the 30M baseless suit Lively filed and lost between her dismissed claims and settlement. With their remaining multi-million dollar attorney fees, the $2.1M mechanics lien on their home, Blake Brown hemorrhaging, the new $5M lawsuit with the tesla, and NYC/NY state/and federal taxes, they're bleeding money out of their bootyhole.

And neither is really working. Blake certainly is not, and films Ryan has made already seem to be on hold. He’s not attached to any big projects. The ones on IMDB, some of them go back to 2019 and I seriously doubt many of those will be made or at least made with him.

He’s got his mint mobile money, I do think he will lose money from Wrexham, but I’m sure they will be fine. Overall they probably just need to get a handle on their spending. When Blake posted the night of the Met gala, she was in her apartment with 4 women surrounding her. Clearly, she does her hair and makeup at home, which is a nice luxury, but that cost money. I don’t think they are really going to be able to adapt to their lifestyle of having less money.

I also saw pictures of their not yet renovated new home in Westchester where they had the liens, and it is hideous. It looks like a giant warehouse who knows when it will be finished. Are they going to move their kids from their current schools? The kids are getting older so they probably need to get that done fast and move. They bought that in 2017 and I wonder if they’re even interested anymore.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Baldoni filed the $400M countersuit in January 2025 and it was tossed in November 2025. 11 months of white shoe attorneys is certainly not a small sum, it's likely several million dollars.

But it wasn’t 11 months of work. Maybe a few weeks to draft and file the motion to dismiss and a few more weeks on preparing for the 47.1 fee hearing. Not millions of dollars and it has to be reasonable fees.

Her lawyers fees will be deemed reasonable even if their rates are high, as long as they are still in line with rates of similar lawyers. She's a celebrity and this was an extremely high profile case, she is entitled to a highly qualified firm. The size of the defamation action will also influence that decision -- if someone filed a $400m defamation claims against you, would you go bargain hunting for lawyers?

It will definitely be more than a few weeks to draft the motion to dismiss. Also we're talking dozens of lawyers here.

They will almost certainly ask for more fees than Limam will grant, but it's not going to be a low number. It won't be 30 million but it's not going to 10k either.

All of her fees will be reviewed for reasonableness and regardless of hourly rate, her team can’t claim it took them 3x the hours to do something like write a motion. Just because she has dozens of lawyers it doesn’t mean she can claim millions in fees and costs.

Again, none of this is money going to her. So she may save some $$$ but she still has to pay the rest of what is surely a large legal bill.

So again, explain how this is a victory?

It's a victory for 47.1. It validates the law. And importantly, it INvalidates Baldoni's sham defamation lawsuit by ensuring he and his friends are on the hook for every penny it cost.

Far from it, Liman clearly felt there was serious Constitutional issues with 47.1. He sidestepped them by not awarding punitive and treble damages on alternative grounds. The fee shifting aspect of 47.1 was never the issue with it. Even so, I don't think Liman's finding regarding lack of malice would have withstood appeal, and I think he knows that. But he really didn't want to be the judge to find 47.1 unconstitutional so he sidestepped it.

You are confiding fees and damages.

He awarded all fees. So yes, Baldoni will have to pay for all costs associated with his meritless defamation claim.

No, Baldoni isn't paying anything, Wayfarer is. And the most they're getting is 300k capped. Literally peanuts in comparison to the 30M baseless suit Lively filed and lost between her dismissed claims and settlement. With their remaining multi-million dollar attorney fees, the $2.1M mechanics lien on their home, Blake Brown hemorrhaging, the new $5M lawsuit with the tesla, and NYC/NY state/and federal taxes, they're bleeding money out of their bootyhole.

Anonymous wrote:I'm so confused how the fee thing works

What is confusing?

I'm so confused how the fee thing works

These two idiots can’t catch a break. Apparently Ryan hit someone with his Tesla in Manhattan and they’re suing for $5 million.

https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15889001/ryan-reynolds-lawsuit-tesla-crash-company-New-York.html

Anonymous wrote:The judge found that there was no evidence of malice produced by Wayfarer. That's a moral victory for Lively. Obviously not a huge financial one compared to what she was asking for or spend on legal fees, etc.

Sigh, you misrepresent things again. He said they didn’t request a hearing to present further evidence so based on the limited info from the hearing he couldn’t determine they met the bar.

Anonymous wrote:The judge found that there was no evidence of malice produced by Wayfarer. That's a moral victory for Lively. Obviously not a huge financial one compared to what she was asking for or spend on legal fees, etc.

Yes, that's the part of his decision that would have been overturned on appeal, it's not even a close question. The case wasn't at a point where they would have had to provide such evidence, and he acknowledges that in his decision by saying there should be a hearing on that issue but they failed to request one. He wanted a decision that would have no precedential value and got there on malice by saying WF lawyers didn't properly request a hearing.

One tiny thing I noticed in the decision is that Liman gives a laundry list of possible reasons a lawsuit could be dismissed as frivolous, including lack of personal jurisdiction, in pointing out that this is not grounds to deny application of 47.1 if the claim otherwise falls under 47.1. That hints at the Jed Wallace Texas case. That court isn't bound by this decision, but as there is little authority on 47.1 it will be interesting to see if they address it (no doubt Lively's attorneys will note it and run over there to file some kind of letter about it).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Baldoni filed the $400M countersuit in January 2025 and it was tossed in November 2025. 11 months of white shoe attorneys is certainly not a small sum, it's likely several million dollars.

But it wasn’t 11 months of work. Maybe a few weeks to draft and file the motion to dismiss and a few more weeks on preparing for the 47.1 fee hearing. Not millions of dollars and it has to be reasonable fees.

Her lawyers fees will be deemed reasonable even if their rates are high, as long as they are still in line with rates of similar lawyers. She's a celebrity and this was an extremely high profile case, she is entitled to a highly qualified firm. The size of the defamation action will also influence that decision -- if someone filed a $400m defamation claims against you, would you go bargain hunting for lawyers?

It will definitely be more than a few weeks to draft the motion to dismiss. Also we're talking dozens of lawyers here.

They will almost certainly ask for more fees than Limam will grant, but it's not going to be a low number. It won't be 30 million but it's not going to 10k either.

All of her fees will be reviewed for reasonableness and regardless of hourly rate, her team can’t claim it took them 3x the hours to do something like write a motion. Just because she has dozens of lawyers it doesn’t mean she can claim millions in fees and costs.

Again, none of this is money going to her. So she may save some $$$ but she still has to pay the rest of what is surely a large legal bill.

So again, explain how this is a victory?

It's a victory for 47.1. It validates the law. And importantly, it INvalidates Baldoni's sham defamation lawsuit by ensuring he and his friends are on the hook for every penny it cost.

Far from it, Liman clearly felt there was serious Constitutional issues with 47.1. He sidestepped them by not awarding punitive and treble damages on alternative grounds. The fee shifting aspect of 47.1 was never the issue with it. Even so, I don't think Liman's finding regarding lack of malice would have withstood appeal, and I think he knows that. But he really didn't want to be the judge to find 47.1 unconstitutional so he sidestepped it.

You are confiding fees and damages.

He awarded all fees. So yes, Baldoni will have to pay for all costs associated with his meritless defamation claim.

Costs means litigation costs, not damages (like the cost of stenographer if there were depositions related to the defamatio claim, which didn't happen here). Those will be minimal to nonexistent with a motion to dismiss. Her award will be attorney's fees related to the defamation claim in the motion to dismiss. Peanuts. And exactly what Fritz said it would be weeks ago.

The judge found that there was no evidence of malice produced by Wayfarer. That's a moral victory for Lively. Obviously not a huge financial one compared to what she was asking for or spend on legal fees, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Baldoni filed the $400M countersuit in January 2025 and it was tossed in November 2025. 11 months of white shoe attorneys is certainly not a small sum, it's likely several million dollars.

But it wasn’t 11 months of work. Maybe a few weeks to draft and file the motion to dismiss and a few more weeks on preparing for the 47.1 fee hearing. Not millions of dollars and it has to be reasonable fees.

Her lawyers fees will be deemed reasonable even if their rates are high, as long as they are still in line with rates of similar lawyers. She's a celebrity and this was an extremely high profile case, she is entitled to a highly qualified firm. The size of the defamation action will also influence that decision -- if someone filed a $400m defamation claims against you, would you go bargain hunting for lawyers?

It will definitely be more than a few weeks to draft the motion to dismiss. Also we're talking dozens of lawyers here.

They will almost certainly ask for more fees than Limam will grant, but it's not going to be a low number. It won't be 30 million but it's not going to 10k either.

The NY Times is seeking less than $200,000 in fees for their motion to dismiss in this case.

Saying it again, Blake spent far more on briefing 47.1 than she is going to recover for the defamation portion of her motion to dismiss given that she submitted multiple briefs and there was oral argument on 47.1. The amount awarded will probably be less than 1 percent of the $36 million plus she is rumored to have spent.

Futher, I worked in big law and worked on far more complicated cases. There shouldn't be more than three or four attorneys working on a motion to dismiss.

Exactly. This is a small win at best - she still owes her attorneys millions and gets $0 in damages

It depends on whether you care about this before ng a personal win for Blake or a legal win for victim's rights.

Blake can afford to go on without damages, but her win here benefits all survivors who may seek to recover under 47.1.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Baldoni filed the $400M countersuit in January 2025 and it was tossed in November 2025. 11 months of white shoe attorneys is certainly not a small sum, it's likely several million dollars.

But it wasn’t 11 months of work. Maybe a few weeks to draft and file the motion to dismiss and a few more weeks on preparing for the 47.1 fee hearing. Not millions of dollars and it has to be reasonable fees.

Her lawyers fees will be deemed reasonable even if their rates are high, as long as they are still in line with rates of similar lawyers. She's a celebrity and this was an extremely high profile case, she is entitled to a highly qualified firm. The size of the defamation action will also influence that decision -- if someone filed a $400m defamation claims against you, would you go bargain hunting for lawyers?

It will definitely be more than a few weeks to draft the motion to dismiss. Also we're talking dozens of lawyers here.

They will almost certainly ask for more fees than Limam will grant, but it's not going to be a low number. It won't be 30 million but it's not going to 10k either.

All of her fees will be reviewed for reasonableness and regardless of hourly rate, her team can’t claim it took them 3x the hours to do something like write a motion. Just because she has dozens of lawyers it doesn’t mean she can claim millions in fees and costs.

Again, none of this is money going to her. So she may save some $$$ but she still has to pay the rest of what is surely a large legal bill.

So again, explain how this is a victory?

It's a victory for 47.1. It validates the law. And importantly, it INvalidates Baldoni's sham defamation lawsuit by ensuring he and his friends are on the hook for every penny it cost.

Far from it, Liman clearly felt there was serious Constitutional issues with 47.1. He sidestepped them by not awarding punitive and treble damages on alternative grounds. The fee shifting aspect of 47.1 was never the issue with it. Even so, I don't think Liman's finding regarding lack of malice would have withstood appeal, and I think he knows that. But he really didn't want to be the judge to find 47.1 unconstitutional so he sidestepped it.

You are confiding fees and damages.

He awarded all fees. So yes, Baldoni will have to pay for all costs associated with his meritless defamation claim.