Justin Baldoni vs Blake Lively: It Ends with Us Director’s Lawsuit Faces Roadblock as Judge Grants Stay of Discovery

by

In simpler terms, a U.S. court judge has temporarily halted the process of gathering evidence in a $400 million defamation lawsuit filed by Justin Baldoni against The New York Times. This lawsuit also implicates Blake Lively, Ryan Reynolds, and Lively’s publicist, but for now, they are not required to provide any evidence.

On March 4, a ruling was made that momentarily suspends the sharing of documents and data while the court considers the New York Times’ request to drop the case, as stated in the court papers acquired by E News.

On February 28, The New York Times submitted a petition seeking dismissal from Justin Baldoni’s legal action. This is because the newspaper was incorporated into the lawsuit as a result of its news coverage about Rebecca Lively’s complaint to the California Civil Rights Department.

According to U.S. District Judge Lewis J. Liman, the New York Times’ argument was convincing and demonstrated a high likelihood of success in their request to dismiss the case based on its underlying facts.

Baldoni’s legal representatives contended that the process of obtaining evidence from The New York Times wouldn’t be overwhelming due to its confined timeline. Yet, Judge Liman pointed out that the weight of discovery is not solely dependent on the number of documents, but also on the intricacy and confidential nature of the data at hand.

The temporary halt on information requests (stay of discovery) prevents Justin Baldoni’s team from obtaining data from the NYT at this moment. If the motion to dismiss is not granted, they can request the required information later when the court makes a decision. In his judgment, Liman stated that it is unlikely the parties involved would be unfairly disadvantaged by this stay while the court considers the pending motion.

In adhering to my professional principles, I swiftly ensured that The New York Times filed their motion within the prescribed 21-day window post service. I want to reassure you all that the court is diligently working to render its decision prior to the commencement of depositions, demonstrating our commitment to efficiency and prompt resolution in this matter.

During this time, it’s clear that both parties will be occupied with gathering documents from each other as well as from external sources, Liman noted.

A representative of The New York Times expressed approval towards the verdict, explaining that it supports fundamental principles under the First Amendment. They asserted that the judgment shields the newspaper from unjust legal obligations in a lawsuit they deem unwarranted.

In my role as a committed follower, I’d like to share that I personally stand by The New York Times’ reporting, which reveals that Blake Lively raised significant concerns regarding her treatment during the filming process and post-release of the movie.

I passionately affirm that, just like any responsible news outlet should, The New York Times is merely discharging its duty to keep the public informed, by reporting on the complaint Johnny Depp’s wife, Amber Heard, filed with the California Civil Rights Department.

Regarding Baldoni’s recent victory, it’s important to note that his legal struggle persists. In addition to this case, he has initiated another lawsuit worth $250 million for defamation against the same newspaper.

Based on the ruling of the ongoing motion to dismiss, it will be decided if The New York Times continues as a party involved in the case. The court’s ultimate decision carries substantial importance for both Baldoni and the media’s function in reporting on prominent disagreements.

Read More

2025-03-06 13:38