24 Civ. 10049

Subscribe to 24 Civ. 10049 via RSS

On Friday, Judge Liman granted Blake Lively’s motion for attorneys’ fees and costs, but denied her request for damages (including treble and punitive damages), following the court’s dismissal of a lawsuit filed by Justin Baldoni and his production company accusing Lively of defamation arising from the filming of It Ends With Us (see our prior coverage of the cases here).

Last month, the parties settled their disputes, including Lively’s related lawsuit alleging sexual harassment and retaliation, but left for the Court to decide Lively’s request for fees, costs, and damages under California Civil Code Section 47.1.

Enacted in 2023 in response to the #MeToo movement, Section 47.1 establishes a qualified privilege for communications made without malice concerning sexual harassment, assault, or discrimination, and it permits a prevailing defamation defendant to recover attorneys’ fees, costs and damages.

Continue Reading Judge Liman: Rule 54(d) Does Not Authorize Blake Lively To Recover “Damages” For Dismissed Defamation Action Against Her

On Tuesday, Judge Liman ordered the sealing of certain documents in Blake Lively’s ongoing lawsuit alleging sexual harassment and retaliation claims against Justin Baldoni and his production company, in connection with the filming of It Ends With Us. The parties had filed various motions to seal and unseal in connection with Lively’s motion for spoilation sanctions and defendants’ motion for summary judgment. 

Continue Reading Judge Liman: Relevance of Documents to Summary Judgment “Not a Threshold Issue” for Sealing Determinations

On Thursday, Judge Liman granted plaintiff Blake Lively’s motion to strike a letter from the docket in her ongoing lawsuit alleging sexual harassment and retaliation claims against Justin Baldoni and his production company, in connection with the filming of It Ends With Us. The challenged letter “accused Lively, and her counsel, of engaging in witness tampering and evidence spoliation based on an undisclosed anonymous source.”

The Court, noting that it had “inherent power to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases” and the authority to “strike materials outside the pleadings that are abusive or otherwise improper,” explained that the letter “must be stricken” because it was improper and irrelevant. Specifically, the Court concluded:

Continue Reading Judge Liman: Court Has “Inherent” Authority to Strike Inflammatory Baldoni Letter from Public Docket