What if Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni could settle with a walk-away?

What if Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni could settle and walk-away. Well . . . they can. Below I have pasted a slide scan from my February 18, post, suggesting just that – that they agree to a walk-away settlement and move on with their lives and careers. It would be difficult to get either of them to pay money to the other without having to go to trial, after which an appeal might be expected. It also would be difficult but perhaps not impossible for them to agree to a working together arrangement, but that seems unlikely. They have each proven a point or two, but there is no adjudication, and the outcome of any adjudication and damage that might be awarded, if any, are uncertain. I still recommend a walk-away. Below I have pasted my slide from my February 18, post – even with changes and orders that have already occurred claims and defenses remain. Below I have also pasted my February 9, post titled: Interesting from the Lively/Baldoni litigation: defamation and civil extortion allegations.

February 18, 2025 slide (repost):

February 9, post (repost): Interesting from the Lively/Baldoni litigation: defamation and civil extortion allegations:

I am finding the defamation and civil extortion allegations some of the more interesting from a legal perspective, of course while seeing the allegations and the arguments and supposed evidence presented to the public is very interesting and something that we almost never see. Broadly speaking, defamation is: an untrue statement of fact or purported fact (e.g., not opinion) that is published (i.e., said or in print or in writing) to a third party (i.e. not simply to the person about whom the statement or writing is about, but to a third person) that hurts the reputation of the person about whom the statement or writing is about.

In Lively/Baldoni there are allegations that defamatory statements were made by Lively and by Baldoni themselves, and by agents such as PR or crisis firms representing Lively and Baldoni, and by the regular press (NYT). The allegations against the press include allegations that what they wrote was defamatory because of the alleged selective or incomplete nature of the statements and information that were included in the writing – thus allegedly not presenting an accurate writing or statement and alleged defamatory. If you are wondering, yes, a claim of defamation can be alleged on the basis of an alleged selective or incomplete statement or writing. As defamation is not an uncommon possibility, you might also be wondering whether someone possibly has defamed someone else in your circles or activities – slander (i.e., spoken) or libel (i.e., written).

There is a lot of discovery to be done – requests and subpoenas for documents, taking depositions, interrogatories, requests for admissions, experts, and more.

Keep in mind however, that none of what you are seeing is actual evidence that has been rebutted or cross-examined or questioned or even presented and admitted into evidence in Court at trial. I will be providing additional posts pertaining to defamation, and we also have not touched on the claim of civil extortion, or on the allegations of hostile or harassing workplace environment (including in the context of the script, the filming, and Hollywood), or on the efforts to resolve issues during the filming, or on workplace and filming oversight, diligence and compliance by HR, executive and management officers, boards/committees, and others.

Also keep in mind that the allegations, documents and arguments that you are seeing are or will be questions and issues of fact to be applied to the applicable laws and to be determined by the trier of fact (i.e., the jury). No one knows how the claims would be viewed by the selected jury at trial. And I should add that of course the above is just a summary discussion – for example, some statements are privileged or protected, there can be First Amendment freedom of speech issues, there are differing standards of culpability or wrongdoing depending on whether the person to whom the alleged statement applies is a public person or figure, and in California you can have anti-SLAPP issues, in addition to other issues, criteria and elements.

See also:

David Tate, Esq.

Please reach out on this topic or on other topics if you wish.

* * * *

Thank you for viewing and reading this discussion. Please do pass this blog and blog post and information to other people who would be interested as it is only through collaboration and sharing that great things and success are more quickly achieved. If you are interested in discussing anything that I have said in the discussion above or in either of my two blogs (see blog addresses below), or if you simply want to reach out or are seeking assistance, it is best to reach me by email at dave@tateattorney.com.

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

Trust, estate, probate, power of attorney, fiduciary, beneficiary, conservatorship, and elder and dependent adult abuse litigation and contentious administrations, undue influence, fraud and deceit, physical and mental health and challenging and contentious personalities and relationships.

Trust, estate and probate administrations and litigation involving special assets such as business ownership interests and operating businesses, asset co-ownership disputes, contentious governance, intellectual property assets, art and collectible assets, ongoing future contractual rights, buyouts and sales, M&A disputes, businesses divorces, and accountings.

Businesses and third party disputes and litigation – contract, licensing, co-business, royalty and other arrangements, unfair business practices, fraud and deceit, lack of good faith and fair dealing, buyouts and sales, mergers, acquisitions, ventures, etc.

Business co-ownership and internal governance disputes and litigation, business divorces, buyouts and sales, merger and acquisition disputes, family, closely held and professional businesses, accountings, and audits, D&O, boards, audit committees and investigations. Legal authority, duties, rights, conflicts of interest, diligence, compliance, liability, BJR, legal risk management, and resolution.

Real property and co-ownership disputes and litigation.

Trials.

Mediator and dispute and litigation resolution services.

Legal risk and uncertainty management processes – authority, duties, rights, conflicts of interest, governance, diligence, compliance, liability, and resolution.

Other and additional disputes, litigation and issues that fall within the above areas – court and trial evidence, persuasion, debate and fallacies, using AI assistance, IP, meetings, defamation, risk management processes, workplace, new laws, regulations and government actions – impact/legality, law and legal matters in the news, etc.

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation, or as or for my opinions and views on the subject matter.

Also note – sometimes I include links to or comments about materials from other organizations or people – if I do so, it is because I believe that the materials are worthwhile reading or viewing; however, that does not mean that I do not or that I might not have a different view about some or even all of the subject matter or materials, or that I necessarily agree with, or agree with everything about or relating to, that organization or person, or those materials or the subject matter.

Please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My blogs are:

http://tateattorney.com – business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. – previously at http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Prior blog: Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing only as an attorney in California.

Questions to Consider to Help Facilitate Legal Dispute Evaluation, Resolution and Settlement – David W. Tate, Esq.

Greetings. Below I have attached a pdf of my updated Questions to Consider to Help Facilitate Legal Dispute Evaluation, Resolution and Settlement. Please read and forward to other people who will find it useful.

David Tate, Esq.

Please reach out on this topic or on other topics if you wish.

* * * *

Thank you for viewing and reading this discussion. Please do pass this blog and blog post and information to other people who would be interested as it is only through collaboration and sharing that great things and success are more quickly achieved. If you are interested in discussing anything that I have said in the discussion above or in either of my two blogs (see blog addresses below), or if you simply want to reach out or are seeking assistance, it is best to reach me by email at dave@tateattorney.com.

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

Trust, estate, probate, power of attorney, fiduciary, beneficiary, conservatorship, and elder and dependent adult abuse litigation and contentious administrations, undue influence, fraud and deceit, physical and mental health and challenging and contentious personalities and relationships.

Trust, estate and probate administrations and litigation involving special assets such as business ownership interests and operating businesses, asset co-ownership disputes, contentious governance, intellectual property assets, art and collectible assets, ongoing future contractual rights, buyouts and sales, M&A disputes, businesses divorces, and accountings.

Businesses and third party disputes and litigation – contract, licensing, co-business, royalty and other arrangements, unfair business practices, fraud and deceit, lack of good faith and fair dealing, buyouts and sales, mergers, acquisitions, ventures, etc.

Business co-ownership and internal governance disputes and litigation, business divorces, buyouts and sales, merger and acquisition disputes, family, closely held and professional businesses, accountings, and audits, D&O, boards, audit committees and investigations. Legal authority, duties, rights, conflicts of interest, diligence, compliance, liability, BJR, legal risk management, and resolution.

Real property and co-ownership disputes and litigation.

Trials.

Mediator and dispute and litigation resolution services.

Legal risk and uncertainty management processes – authority, duties, rights, conflicts of interest, governance, diligence, compliance, liability, and resolution.

Other and additional disputes, litigation and issues that fall within the above areas – court and trial evidence, persuasion, debate and fallacies, using AI assistance, IP, meetings, defamation, risk management processes, workplace, new laws, regulations and government actions – impact/legality, law and legal matters in the news, etc.

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation, or as or for my opinions and views on the subject matter.

Also note – sometimes I include links to or comments about materials from other organizations or people – if I do so, it is because I believe that the materials are worthwhile reading or viewing; however, that does not mean that I do not or that I might not have a different view about some or even all of the subject matter or materials, or that I necessarily agree with, or agree with everything about or relating to, that organization or person, or those materials or the subject matter.

Please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My blogs are:

http://tateattorney.com – business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. – previously at http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Prior blog: Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing only as an attorney in California.