On Wednesday’s episode of “The Megyn Kelly Show,” the host zeroed in on behind-the-scenes footage during production on “It Ends With Us” released by Baldoni and his legal team on Tuesday. The 10-minute footage shows Lively and Baldoni dancing in one of the film’s romantic scenes cited in Lively’s original complaint. The video shows them being flirtatious on camera but speaking and joking around out of character, discussing the scene at hand, since the scene being filmed wasn’t going to have audio.

Baldoni released the footage, claiming it disproves Lively’s complaint that characterized the moment as being riddled with unwanted sexual advances. Lively’s team responded shortly after Wednesday, calling the footage a “manufactured media stunt” that “corroborates, to the letter, what Ms. Lively described in Paragraph 48 of her Complaint.”

“This matter is in active litigation in federal court,” Lively’s statement continued. “Releasing this video to the media, rather than presenting it as evidence in court, is another example of an unethical attempt to manipulate the public.”

Kelly, however, does not think the footage aligns with how Lively painted the moment in her lawsuit.

On Thursday’s podcast, the host also stated that Lively is trying to place a gag order on Baldoni to stop him from releasing any more to the story from his point of view. The host added that if Lively was telling the truth, she wouldn’t need the gag order.

Watch the full “Megyn Kelly Show” segment below:

“Now that she’s had her shot against him, and she severely damaged him with that New York Times piece in this complaint, which she managed to get leaked, now she wants a complete gag order,” Kelly said. “Now he needs to be shut down to protect her. This is very unfair to poor Blake. Why should Justin be able to release snippets to the media without the full context? That’s what she said. That’s what she did.”

She continued, “I’m just saying this person is not an honest broker. I believe her less than ever. I actually disbelieve her fully now, and they should not be gagged. I will happily participate in releasing any further leaks that they have, because the truth should be out there. What does she have to fear if she’s telling the truth?”

Wednesday’s video is the latest salvo in a weeks-long legal dust-up between the “It Ends With Us” colleagues. Baldoni has already sued the New York Times for $250 million, citing defamation, and stated in a separate lawsuit against Lively and Ryan Reynolds that the Nicepool character in “Deadpool & Wolverine” was created to “mock” him.

Lively has accused Baldoni of improvising without an intimacy coordinator “physical intimacy that had not been rehearsed, choreographed or discussed with [her]” and of coercing her into an unplanned nude scene.

Watch the full “Megyn Kelly Show” clip above.

The post Megyn Kelly Sides With Justin Baldoni After BTS ‘It Ends With Us’ Footage With Blake Lively: ‘I Actually Disbelieve Her Fully Now’ | Video appeared first on TheWrap.

The media giant is accused of breach of contract after South Park Digital Studios made two special episodes available to Paramount and MTV and not WBD; “tortious interference” for causing SPDS to breach its agreement with WBD and “unjust enrichment” because it benefitted from streaming the specials that were outside the scope of the deal.

In a ruling on Tuesday, Justice Margaret A. Chan of Manhattan’s State Supreme Court advanced the case to the discovery stage and denied a motion for partial summary judgement to dismiss the unjust enrichment claim, which Paramount had argued is duplicative to the breach of contract and tortious interference claims.

The ruling moves the case to the discovery stage, clearing the way for a trial.

Warner Bros. Discovery claims that Paramount’s priorities “changed drastically” upon the launch of Paramount+ in 2021, resulting in a “multi-year scheme to unfairly take advantage” of the former conglomerate by breaching its agreement and “stealing its content.”

Per the 2019 agreement, where Warner/HBO outbid others in a highly competitive situation to garner the exclusive rights to the series, the company acquired the series’ entire catalog (23 seasons at the time) in addition to three new installments, totaling more than 300 episodes. Based on the representations made in the deal, WBD alleges that Paramount Global promised exclusivity in hosting all 333 episodes — the 303 existing at the time, in addition to the 30 that would be added across the three new seasons — and that sharing rights was a “non-starter.”

However, as a result of the pandemic, Paramount delayed filming on Season 24, instead producing two nearly hour-long COVID-themed specials that released initially on Comedy Central and were later put on HBO Max. Because of the specials’ longer runtime, WBD paid double the typical single-episode rate. The company says it did not receive Season 24 episodes despite the entry of a new deal in 2021 between the show’s creators and the Paramount subsidiary MTV worth $900 million to produce 14 original movies for Paramount+. At the time, the series was also renewed through Season 30.

Chan found that the “ambiguous contract” is “silent on vital details,” such as “how to decide what is in the Seasons 24-26 and whether plaintiff can pursue disgorgement against third parties who stream content before the plaintiff.”

“As such, the dispute is not properly addressed by the contract,” she wrote. “Given the ambiguity of the Term Sheet, parol evidence will likely be necessary to determine whether and how the Term Sheet applies — parol evidence that is unavailable at this early stage of litigation. Thus, summary judgment is denied as premature.”

Chan also said that the unjust enrichment and tortious interference claims in the case “share little overlap,” making it premature to determine whether the former claim is duplicative.

“Because there are still disputed facts regarding the scope of the parties’ relationships and the rights to the Specials, plaintiff is not required to elect between tortious interference and unjust enrichment at this stage,” Chan added. “After discovery, when the facts are no longer in dispute, plaintiff can choose a claim.”

In addition to the three existing claims, Paramount previously faced two additional claims of “breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing” and “violation of New York Business Law,” though those had been dropped in November.

The post ‘South Park’ Streaming Rights Battle Between Paramount and WBD Moves to Discovery Stage appeared first on TheWrap.

“[We offer a] full and unequivocal apology to the Duke of Sussex for the serious intrusion by The Sun between 1996 and 2011 into his private life, including incidents of unlawful activities carried out by private investigators,” the settlement read, per The AP.

“NGN further apologizes to the duke for the impact on him of the extensive coverage and serious intrusion into his private life as well as the private life of Diana, Princess of Wales, his late mother, in particular during his younger years,” it continued. “We acknowledge and apologize for the distress caused to the duke, and the damage inflicted on relationships, friendships and family, and have agreed to pay him substantial damages.”

That payment, according to People, is reportedly somewhere in the eight figures. The trial was set to begin Tuesday, but was delayed. Harry was not present in court on Wednesday.

In turn, Prince Harry shared a statement of his own through his attorney, David Sherborne: “This represents a vindication for the hundreds of other claimants who were strong-armed into settling without being able to get to the truth of what was done to them.”

Of the 1,300+ people who initially accused NGN’s papers of allegedly hacking their phones and other corrupt activity — including Hugh Grant — only Harry and another man remained on the case ahead of trial, as the others had all previously settled or backed down.

Furthermore, Sherborne accused NGN of crafting “an extensive conspiracy” in which “senior executives deliberately obstructed justice.” While they had admitted fault in the past by shuttering News of the World, this apology also places some blame on The Sun for decades of intrusion.

“At her trial in 2014, Rebekah Brooks said, ‘When I was editor of The Sun, we ran a clean ship,’” Harry’s statement noted. ”Now, 10 years later when she is CEO of the company, they now admit, when she was editor of The Sun, they ran a criminal enterprise.”

This update also comes more than a year after the royal won his similar lawsuit against British tabloid publisher Mirror Group Newspapers.

The post Prince Harry Receives ‘Full and Unequivocal Apology’ From Rupert Murdoch’s News Group Newspapers Upon Settlement appeared first on TheWrap.

The series, which premiered on Investigation Discovery in October, looks back at the various scandals the R&B hitmaker has had as well as accusations of rape against him. It also features the first interview with the anonymous Jane Doe who sued him in 2022, accusing him of drugging and raping her in 2020; her lawsuit said the alleged incident took place at a party on a yacht owned by Diddy. The lawsuit was tossed by a judge in August of 2022.

In the lawsuit, a copy of which was obtained by TheWrap, Brown denies all wrongdoing and accuses WB and the docuseries’ producers of “promoting and publishing false information in their pursuit of likes, clicks, downloads and dollars and to the detriment of Chris Brown,” and says the documentary aired despite them “knowing that it was full of lies and deception and violating basic journalistic principles.”

The lawsuit says that the defendants were “provided proof that their information was false, and their storytelling ‘Jane Doe’ had not only been discredited over and over but was in fact a perpetrator of intimate partner violence and aggressor herself.”

The suit also asserts that Brown “has never been found guilty of any sex-related crime (rape, sexual battery, sexual assault, etc.) but this documentary states in every available fashion that he is a serial rapist and sexual abuser.”

The suit also brings up the Jane Doe’s personal history, asserting she herself had a “history of violence and erratic behavior” which “should have raised red flags for any responsible journalist,” along with a copy of what it says is a restraining order her ex-boyfriend filed against her which said “she physically assaulted him, threatened him with a knife and engaged in online harassment.”

Brown’s lawsuit asserts that the woman was arrested for this behavior by LAPD, information “disregarded by the Defendants, who instead framed her as a reliable source to bolster their sensationalized portrayal instead of the physical aggressor in a romantic relationship.”

The lawsuit also names several people who appeared in the documentary as defendants, and says “a portion” of the $500 million “will be donated to survivors of sexual abuse” if Brown prevails.

In a statement posted to Brown’s Instagram feed, his attorney, Levi McCathern said, “This case is about protecting the truth… Despite being provided with evidence disproving their claims, the producers of this documentary intentionally promoted false and defamatory information, knowingly disregarding their ethical obligations as journalists. Their actions undermine not only Mr. Brown’s decade-long efforts to rebuild his life but also the credibility of true survivors of violence.”

The post Chris Brown Sues Warner Bros. and Producers of Documentary Show About Sexual Assault Accusations for $500 Million appeared first on TheWrap.

The 10-minute clip, which all takes place during one romantic dance scene cited in Lively’s original complaint, shows the two actors laughing and improvising small talk for various takes.

The video’s release marked the latest public attack between Baldoni, the film’s star-director-producer, and Lively since sexual harassment allegations against Baldoni were first made public last month. Most recently, Baldoni named Lively and her husband Ryan Reynolds in a $400 million defamation and extortion suit last week. Lively’s legal team responded by calling the lawsuit “desperate.”

The actress was first to sue with her federal sexual harassment filing in December that asked for unspecified damages. The dance scene featured in the newly released video, which does not include any dialogue in the finished film, was referenced in Lively’s suit. It cites the fact that the actors were not in character and that at one point, Baldoni “leaned forward and slowly dragged his lips from her ear and down her neck as he said, ‘It smells so good'” in a way that the actress found inappropriate.

In a statement to media, Lively’s legal team slammed Baldoni’s behind-the-scenes video, calling it a “manufactured media stunt” that “corroborates, to the letter, what Ms. Lively described in Paragraph 48 of her Complaint.”

“This matter is in active litigation in federal court,” the statement continued. “Releasing this video to the media, rather than presenting it as evidence in court, is another example of an unethical attempt to manipulate the public.”

Baldoni, who also directed the domestic abuse drama, has already sued the New York Times for $250 million, citing defamation.

Lively has accused Baldoni of improvising “physical intimacy that had not been rehearsed, choreographed or discussed with [her],” and without the involvement of an intimacy coordinator and of coercing her into an unplanned nude scene.

For his part, Baldoni’s lawyer alleged that Lively used her star power to banish Baldoni at the film’s premiere and that the actor had to “hide in the basement” for an hour.

The former “Jane the Virgin” actor has also suggested that the Nicepool character in Reynolds’ “Deadpool & Wolverine,” who jokes about an intimacy coordinator at one point, was created to “mock” him.

TMZ first reported this story.

Read the full response from Lively’s team below:

“Every frame of the released footage corroborates, to the letter, what Ms. Lively described in Paragraph 48 of her Complaint. The video shows Mr. Baldoni repeatedly leaning in toward Ms. Lively, attempting to kiss her, kissing her forehead, rubbing his face and mouth against her neck, flicking her lip with his thumb, caressing her, telling her how good she smells, and talking with her out of character. Every moment of this was improvised by Mr. Baldoni with no discussion or consent in advance, and no intimacy coordinator present. Mr. Baldoni was not only Ms. Lively’s co-star, but the director, the head of studio and Ms. Lively’s boss.

“The video shows Ms. Lively leaning away and repeatedly asking for the characters to just talk. Any woman who has been inappropriately touched in the workplace will recognize Ms. Lively’s discomfort. They will recognize her attempts at levity to try to deflect the unwanted touching. No woman should have to take defensive measures to avoid being touched by their employer without their consent.

“This matter is in active litigation in federal court. Releasing this video to the media, rather than presenting it as evidence in court, is another example of an unethical attempt to manipulate the public. It is also a continuation of their harassment and retaliatory campaign. While they are focused on misleading media narratives, we are focused on the legal process. We are continuing our efforts to require Mr. Baldoni and his associates to answer in court, under oath, rather than through manufactured media stunts.”

Editor’s note: An earlier version of this story did not include the response from Lively’s Manatt, Phelps & Phillips attorneys and Willkie Farr & Gallagher legal team, which is not included in full above.

The post Justin Baldoni Releases BTS ‘It Ends With Us’ Video With Blake Lively, Claims Footage Disproves Sexual Harassment Allegations appeared first on TheWrap.

The settlement was made while the jury deliberated on how much CNN owed in punitive damages for libel. Earlier in the day, the network was ordered to pay Zachary Young $5 million in compensatory damages.

After the judge announced that a settlement had been reached, one of the jurors asked if they could hear said number. When the judge looked at both CNN and Young’s attorneys and received no response, they replied, “Apparently not.”

“We remain proud of our journalists and are 100% committed to strong, fearless and fair-minded reporting at CNN, though we will of course take what useful lessons we can from this case,” a CNN spokesperson told TheWrap.

Young sued CNN in June 2022 for defamation after he said their segment on him “destroyed his reputation” and his security consulting business, Nemex Enterprises, Inc. The segment, reported by CNN chief security correspondent Alex Marquardt, said Young operated on the “black market” and “exploited” desperate Afghans fleeing the country following the U.S. Military’s withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021.

To leave the country, Afghans were being charged “exorbitant, often impossible amounts,” Marquardt said before a picture of Young was shown. The segment then said Young’s security company was charging $14,500 per person, or $75,000 for vehicles with passengers, to whisk them out — “prices well beyond the reach of most Afghans,” Marquardt noted.

The segment then showed Marquardt allegedly attempting to reach Young by phone. Young did not answer, and Marquardt said the veteran “repeatedly declined to break down the cost or say if he’s making money.”

This became a key point in the trial, as Young claimed Marquardt never made the phone call. Behind-the-scenes footage shown at the trial showed the reporter joking with colleagues it was all “theater,” per Fox News. Marquardt testified he made the phone call and that the “theater” claim was just a joke alluding to “Saturday Night Live.”

Tapper’s teasers for the segment — which first ran on his show on Nov. 11, 2021 — were another important factor in the trial. “Afghans trying to get out of the country face a black market full of promises, demands of exorbitant fees and no guarantee of safety or success,” he said in one of the clips.

On Friday, the Florida jury sided with Young following a nine-day trial. The jury awarded him $4 million in lost earnings and another $1 million in personal damages, and also determined punitive damages could be awarded before the settlement was reached.

Key aspects of CNN’s finances were heard by the jury before making its decision. The network, according to financial documents shared in court, saw its net worth nearly sliced in half from 2021 to ’23; CNN’s revenue also dropped 18.8% during that time, from $2.2 billion annually to $1.8 billion in 2023, the most recent year for which financial figures were available.

The post CNN Pays Navy Veteran Undisclosed Defamation Settlement After Jury Orders $5 Million in Damages appeared first on TheWrap.

Young sued CNN in June 2022 for defamation after he said their segment on him “destroyed his reputation” and his security consulting business, Nemex Enterprises, Inc. The segment, reported by CNN chief security correspondent Alex Marquardt, said Young operated on the “black market” and “exploited” desperate Afghans fleeing the country following the U.S. Military’s withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021.

To leave the country, Afghans were being charged “exorbitant, often impossible amounts,” Marquardt said before a picture of Young was shown. The segment then said Young’s security company was charging $14,500 per person, or $75,000 for vehicles with passengers, to whisk them out — “prices well beyond the reach of most Afghans,” Marquardt noted.

The segment then showed Marquardt allegedly attempting to reach Young by phone. Young did not answer, and Marquardt said the veteran “repeatedly declined to break down the cost or say if he’s making money.”

This became a key point in the trial, as Young claimed Marquardt never made the phone call. Behind-the-scenes footage shown at the trial showed the reporter joking with colleagues it was all “theater,” per Fox News. Marquardt testified he made the phone call and that the “theater” claim was just a joke alluding to “Saturday Night Live.”

Tapper’s teasers for the segment — which first ran on his show on Nov. 11, 2021 — were another important factor in the trial.

“Afghans trying to get out of the country face a black market full of promises, demands of exorbitant fees and no guarantee of safety or success,” he said in one of the teasers.

On Friday, the Florida jury sided with Young following a nine-day trial. The jury awarded him $4 million in lost earnings and another $1 million in personal damages, adding that further punitive damages are also warranted against the network.

The post CNN Owes $5 Million for Defamation of Navy Veteran appeared first on TheWrap.

“This latest lawsuit from Justin Baldoni, Wayfarer Studios and its associates is another chapter in the abuser playbook,” representatives for Lively’s legal team said in a statement to People. They also likened Baldoni’s strategy to DARVO, the shorthand for how abusers discredit their victims, which stands for deny, attack and reverse victim offender.

“Their response to sexual harassment allegations: she wanted it, it’s her fault,” the statement noted. “Their justification for why this happened to her: look what she was wearing. In short, while the victim focuses on the abuse, the abuser focuses on the victim. The strategy of attacking the woman is desperate, it does not refute the evidence in Ms. Lively’s complaint, and it will fail.”

The legal team also accused Baldoni and his team of trying to “shift the narrative” to claim that Lively took over creative control of the movie and “alienated” the cast from Baldoni. “The evidence will show that the cast and others had their own negative experiences with Mr. Baldoni and Wayfarer,” the statement continued. “The evidence will also show that Sony asked Ms. Lively to oversee Sony’s cut of the film, which they then selected for distribution and was a resounding success.”

On Thursday, Baldoni filed a $400 million lawsuit against Reynolds, Lively and her publicist, claiming that Lively “falsified” stories that the director sexually harassed her. Baldoni also sued the New York Times for $250 million for its article “‘We Can Bury Anyone’: Inside a Hollywood Smear Machine,” citing “defamatory” reporting as the reason.

His lawsuit against Lively is actually a countersuit as Lively sued Baldoni in late December for breach of contract over what she described as a smear campaign against her. She initially accused him of sexual harassment in December.

Following Baldoni’s Thursday filing, his lawyer Bryan Freedman told TheWrap, in part: “This lawsuit is a legal action based on an overwhelming amount of untampered evidence detailing Blake Lively and her team’s duplicitous attempt to destroy Justin Baldoni, his team and their respective companies by disseminating grossly edited, unsubstantiated, new and doctored information to the media.”

“Let’s not forget, Ms. Lively and her team attempted to bulldoze reputations and livelihoods for heinously selfish reasons through their own dangerous manipulation of the media before even taking any actual legal action,” the statement continued. “We know the truth, and now the public does too.”

The post Blake Lively’s Legal Team Calls Justin Baldoni’s $400 Million Lawsuit ‘Desperate’ appeared first on TheWrap.

“There seems to already be a public fatigue with the back and forth here, with neither seemingly clearly free from blame, and no single incident that either can point to as a clearly horrendous act that deserves public backlash,” Los Angeles attorney Camron Dowlatshahi of MSD Lawyers told TheWrap on Thursday.

Lively gained a tremendous advantage by filing her sexual harassment suit against Baldoni before Christmas, according to legal analysts, but public support for the actress might be shifting as more text messages between the actors emerge, potentially providing room for debate about her allegations. 

On Thursday, Baldoni filed a whopping $400 million countersuit against Lively and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, whom he accuses of mocking him with the Nicepool character in “Deadpool & Wolverine.” Last week, Baldoni’s lawyer Bryan Freedman promised that the former “Jane the Virgin” actor was planning to sue Lively “into oblivion.”

“The amount is a bit ludicrous and done to create some shock value,” Dowlatshahi said of Baldoni’s suit.

“It is not uncommon for lawsuits of this type to seek astronomically high damages awards, but I don’t imagine anyone thinks that amount would be awarded and certainly would be very difficult to prove,” Nicole Page, an entertainment lawyer who specializes in sexual harassment cases, said.

Dowlatshahi said that the timing of Lively’s sexual harassment suit during a “dead news cycle” was a “very strategic” move by Manatt, the legal firm representing the actress. “The public got to sit with the Blake Lively version of events for a bit. I think, in the court of public opinion, Blake Lively is ahead right now,” he told TheWrap before Baldoni’s countersuit.

Page said she was “really struck” by the fact that Lively’s suit against Baldoni was filed as a federal court claim in the Southern District of New York.

“That tells me she is willing to sit for depositions and maybe even go to trial,” she explained. “This is not something many people want to do for a whole host of reasons, especially when it comes to sexual harassment and emotional distress damages. You have to prove your damages, which might mean handing over your medical records or your psychiatric record.”

Page, who represented a woman whose memo proved pivotal in the Harvey Weinstein case, emphasized that the sexual harassment suit is “a serious thing” and not just part of a PR campaign. She added: “You don’t make those kinds of allegations and make them publicly if you’re not ready to be deposed and you’re not ready to testify at trial.”

Lively’s case was also helped by The New York Times’ sympathetic Dec. 21 article, “‘We Can Bury Anyone’: Inside a Hollywood Smear Machine,” which covered the filing that alleged the actor and his team conspired to ruin Lively’s reputation ahead of any allegations of wrongdoing on his part. That prompted Baldoni to file a $250 million defamation suit against the publication on Dec. 31.

Meanwhile, in a much lower key, Lively’s team dismissed allegations from the Baldoni camp  — including the claim that this is all the actress’ fault because she “didn’t read the book” the film is based on —  calling it a “distraction” and a “classic” attempt to “blame the victim.”

Scores of actors, including Lively’s “Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants” co-stars, have backed the actress since she filed her suit, while Baldoni has been dropped by WME, sued for breach of contract by his former publicist and become, essentially, persona non grata in Hollywood. 

Support for Lively split along gender lines in the admittedly small sample of three entertainment attorneys TheWrap spoke with. Page backed Lively and predicted Baldoni would soon fold and settle the case. However, two male lawyers, Dowlatshahi and Tre Lovell, felt that Baldoni was gaining credibility and public sympathy.

After Freedman mentioned texts between the actors that potentially contradict some of Lively’s claims, Lovell said he’s been seeing more support for Baldoni online and among his colleagues.

“We’re seeing another side of the story,” Lovell said, adding that the subsequent press about Lively “isn’t very nice.” He continued: “People are starting to think, ‘There’s something more than this.’ What the Baldoni team is doing is working. The tide is turning a little bit.”

Will this case go to trial, or is it more likely to settle?

The battle between Baldoni and Lively has frequently been compared to the case of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard, where Depp ultimately triumphed in court against Heard in a case fueled by negative media and social media takes about his ex-wife.

Dowlatshahi told TheWrap that, like the Depp case, he does see this going to trial. While most cases settle, “this one is unique in that it is a reputational battle. It’s not really about money,” Dowlatshahi said. “Since both sides want to be vindicated in the court of public opinion, it has a much higher chance [of going to trial] than a typical case.” (Lively is asking for unspecified compensatory damages to cover “lost wages” and “mental pain and anguish.”)

However, both Page and Lovell believe that the case, no matter how acrimonious it becomes, will eventually be settled out of court, and that the longer this drags on in the public eye, the more damage it will do to both of their careers.

“Both sides are going to wish this never got out, because most people don’t care,” Lovell said. “This is a feud among celebrities. Nobody got murdered, nobody got raped. It can only hurt the celebrities and their brand,” he said. “They’re going to want to resolve this because it’s just going to hurt their brand if this goes on for the next two or three years.”

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Kristin S. Escalante has scheduled the first court proceeding in the case, a case management conference, for May 1.

Is Lively’s greater star power a factor?

“Blake Lively is the person making that movie happen,” Lovell said of the actress’ star status vs. the lesser-known Baldoni. “I’d be surprised if she’s not the reason why the movie got greenlit. So I don’t know if I see her being the victim as much as her team is claiming.”

Page agreed that “everybody knows who Blake Lively is” and that she’s married to “one of the most powerful men in Hollywood” in Reynolds. By contrast, she said, Baldoni is “kind of a C-lister.” In addition to “Jane the Virgin,” his credits include directing the 2019 tragic teen romance “Five Feet Apart.”

“I’m not worried about Blake Lively,” Page said. “Look at which way the wind is blowing. Nobody wants anything to do with him.”

Does the New York Times defamation suit hold merit?

There was no consensus among the lawyers about the merits of Baldoni’s suit against the Times.

“I don’t think the defamation suit is going to be successful,” Page said. “Maybe tactically, they’re doing it as an extension of the PR campaign. With a public figure in New York, if there’s no actual malice and if the statement is substantially true, you can’t prove defamation.”

Lovell strongly disagreed, saying that if additional Baldoni and Lively texts “showed a different narrative” that the publication wilfully ignored, “that, by definition, is actual malice. If this thing really went sideways, then yes, there is big exposure for The New York Times.”

Now that Baldoni has sued Lively directly, Lovell predicted that public sympathy for the actor will continue to rise, especially if he and his lawyer continue to “shift the narrative” of who has been harmed the most in this ongoing war of words.

“I don’t think it’s really about the litigation. If she’s being harassed, what is her damage?” Lovell asked. “She may have got pissed off a few times, but I didn’t see anything that may rise to the level of sexual harassment.”

He continued: “I’m not trying to demean harassment claims at all. They’ve got to be  taken seriously. But she seems to have gotten the better of him,” he said, referencing newly released audio from Baldoni in which the actor says he “literally was sent to the basement with all my friends and family for over an hour because I wasn’t allowed to be seen” at the film’s August 2024 premiere. 

“He’s the one that’s in the basement with his family for an hour, because she won’t let him go with the cast on one of these marketing things,” Lovell said. “She’s the power player.”

While public sympathy was firmly in Lively’s camp three weeks ago, Baldoni’s team is busy trying to convince the public and the industry that, as someone arguably less famous and less powerful, Baldoni can’t possibly be at fault.

Page characterized Freedman’s messaging as, “Justin is this really good dude, and he’s been bullied, and Ryan Reynolds yelled at him and Blake is just a mean girl.” 

Can either star recover at this point? According to Business Insider, the public mudslinging has soured the public on both Lively and Baldoni, with negative posts about each outdistancing supportive ones.

“The PR campaign looks to be a stalemate at this point, and both may have damaged their careers for a number of reasons,” Dowlatshahi said. “The allegations against both — harassment by Baldoni and insensitivity towards domestic violence by Lively — are certainly damaging and seem to be supported in part.”

Page doesn’t “see any winners here, but this tennis match is far from over. Public litigation seems an awfully expensive way to get the media narrative on your side and at this point, I think the public is just confused.”

The post Who’s Winning the ‘It Ends With Us’ Public Relations War? appeared first on TheWrap.

“Lively could not tolerate her publicly tainted image for even a moment, and
further could not accept that it was entirely of her own making. She needed a scapegoat,” he wrote in Thursday’s filing, obtained by TheWrap. “Rather than admit and take accountability for her own mishaps, she chose to blame Plaintiffs, in a malicious and unforgivably public manner. When she and Reynolds could not force Baldoni and Wayfarer to read a statement she and her representatives prepared, extorting them to ‘take accountability’ in defense of Lively’s actions, she lay in wait for months, preparing to publicly attack Baldoni by falsely claiming that he had sexually harassed her.”

“The same falsified stories she had calculatingly devised and used throughout the production of this film in order to take control were now being used publicly to destroy Baldoni and Plaintiffs,” Baldoni continued.

“Lively stole Wayfarer’s movie, hijacked Wayfarer’s premiere, destroyed Plaintiffs’
personal and professional reputations and livelihood, and aimed to drive Plaintiffs out of business entirely,” he further alleged. “It further appears that Lively worked for months with the equally powerful New York Times to prepare a false and damaging narrative to deploy against Plaintiffs.”

This update came after Lively sued Baldoni on Dec. 31 for breach of contract over what she called an “unconscionable” smear campaign directed at her. Baldoni similarly sued the Times for $250 million over its “defamatory” reporting on Lively’s Dec. 20 sexual harassment complaint against him.

“I hope that my legal action helps pull back the curtain on these sinister retaliatory tactics to harm people who speak up about misconduct and helps protect others who may be targeted,” Lively told NYT following her initial complaint against the director.

In response, Baldoni’s lawyer Bryan Freedman said, “These claims are completely false, outrageous and intentionally salacious with an intent to publicly hurt and rehash a narrative in the media.”

Following Thursday’s filing, Freedman told TheWrap, “This lawsuit is a legal action based on an overwhelming amount of untampered evidence detailing Blake Lively and her team’s duplicitous attempt to destroy Justin Baldoni, his team and their respective companies by disseminating grossly edited, unsubstantiated, new and doctored information to the media. It is clear based on our own all out willingness to provide all complete text messages, emails, video footage and other documentary evidence that was shared between the parties in real time, that this is a battle she will not win and will certainly regret.”

“Blake Lively was either severely misled by her team or intentionally and knowingly misrepresented the truth. Ms. Lively will never again be allowed to continue to exploit actual victims of real harassment solely for her personal reputation gain at the expense of those without power,” his statement continued. “Let’s not forget, Ms. Lively and her team attempted to bulldoze reputations and livelihoods for heinously selfish reasons through their own dangerous manipulation of the media before even taking any actual legal action. We know the truth, and now the public does too. Justin and his team have nothing to hide, documents do not lie.”

Additionally, some of the publicists involved issued the following statement: “It is devastating that we are forced to answer this viciously selfish ongoing litigation littered with documented and provable lies in the midst of the tragedy impacting California where we reside. Five months ago, Ms. Lively chose to promote a film about domestic violence in a way that caused instant negative and organic backlash due to her own highly publicized actions. Instead of accepting responsibility, she decided to cruelly blame us.”

“This malicious attack on private individuals by Ms. Lively and her team in which they chose to spoon feed The New York Times with doctored, out of context and edited text messages in an effort to paint herself as a victim set off a chain of events that has been harmful beyond measure. To be clear, Ms. Lively and her team initiated this smear campaign in the media for the sole intention of gaining undeserved public sympathy for her own missteps,” they continued. “Over the last month, we have received death threats, abhorrent abuse and vile anti-semitic slurs hurled at us due to her decision to use us as scapegoats for her own choices promoting her film in which she made millions of dollars. With this filing, we lift our own curtain of what happens when the entitled weaponize power, fear and money to destroy, intimidate and bully those who get in their way.”

“It Ends With Us” is now streaming on Netflix.

The post Justin Baldoni Sues Blake Lively, Ryan Reynolds for $400 Million Over ‘Falsified Stories’ appeared first on TheWrap.