The May 7, 2026 settlement between Blake Lively and Wayfarer Studios resolved claims with prejudice, waiving appeals, while leaving Lively’s attorneys’ fees and damages motion pending. Freedman’s accusations of Lively lying highlight ongoing tensions. The future ruling on the 47.1 motion remains crucial, as it will impact public perceptions without further appeal options. Continue reading Freedman Cannot Stop Talking, and That Is the Point
On May 7, 2026, Blake Lively and Wayfarer Parties submitted documents settling nearly all claims in their legal dispute, leaving only Lively’s motion under California Civil Code section 47.1. The waiver of appeal rights ensures Judge Liman’s ruling will be final. How this ruling is reported may lead to misconceptions about its actual legal implications. Continue reading Blake Lively v Baldoni Settlement and Pending 47.1 Motion
Latest from the Blake Lively suit. Wayfarer had filed another MJOP (Motion for Judgement on Pleadings https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69510553/1295/lively-v-wayfarer-studios-llc/. Blake replied https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.1403.0.pdf and then Justin Baldoni replied https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69510553/1409/lively-v-wayfarer-studios-llc/ A comprehensive breakdown is here https://www.threads.com/@celebchai/post/DXk6CtHFPQK?xmt=AQF0vqVFNwGZglH7xtm2lhXYJJiHFoMT6jiNavnQRbyviw This post focuses only on the participation clause of 12940 (h). The participation clause is the second half of Section 12940(h). The statute has two clauses separated by the word “or,” and each … Continue reading Blake Lively: Motion for Judgment on Pleadings: The Hidden Safety Net in FEHA Retaliation: Why the Participation Clause Undercuts the Defense Strategy
The Wayfarer Parties’ renewed motion for judgment on the pleadings, derived from Judge Liman’s ruling, appears strong but is likely to fail. The court has already determined that Lively’s belief in opposing harassment was reasonable. Additionally, Lively’s filed complaint with the CRD provides a separate basis for protected activity, undermining the defendants’ argument. Continue reading The Defendants’ Syllogism Has a Hole in It
The Agency Group PR LLC filed a motion for summary judgment on April 10, 2026, targeting Blake Lively’s retaliation claim under FEHA. TAG argues it lacks FEHA-related involvement as a crisis PR firm, while omitting a crucial reservation from the California Supreme Court concerning aiding-and-abetting liability. The case will determine TAG’s potential liability. Continue reading TAG Files Summary Judgment Motion on Aiding and Abetting Claim — But Does the Argument Hold Up?
Judge Lewis J. Liman’s ruling in Lively v. Wayfarer Studios permits Blake Lively to pursue three key claims regarding retaliation under California law, despite dismissing ten others. The court found sufficient evidence for a jury to consider whether the Wayfarer Parties mounted a campaign against her after her harassment report, setting the stage for a trial. Continue reading Blake Lively Survived Three Claims: They Are the Ones That Matter.
On August 8, 2025, Judge Lewis J. Liman ruled in favor of Blake Lively, striking a 292-page deposition transcript from the record for serving no legitimate purpose in the litigation. The judge emphasized that court filings must focus on legal matters, not public relations, and warned against disrespectful language in future submissions. Continue reading Judge Strikes Blake Lively Deposition Filing, Calls Out PR Tactics
Blake Lively’s legal team filed a motion seeking sanctions against attorney Bryan Freedman, alleging he violated a court gag order by publicly discrediting Lively through media appearances. The motion cites multiple instances of Freedman’s statements undermining the integrity of the judicial process and aims to hold him accountable for his alleged misconduct, potentially reshaping the trial’s dynamics. Continue reading Blake Lively Seeks Sanctions: Attorney Bryan Freedman Accused of Violating Gag Order, Weaponizing Media in Defamation Suit
In Lively v. Wayfarer Studios, Blake Lively’s team filed a motion accusing the defendants of obstructing discovery, particularly regarding crucial communications and evidence related to her termination. The motion alleges misuse of privilege and encourages sanctions, arguing for transparency ahead of trial while exposing a pattern of legal evasion and strategic misconduct. Continue reading The Pressure Mounts: Blake Lively Moves to Compel Discovery in Explosive Legal Showdown Against Wayfarer Studios
Leslie Sloane’s firm filed a motion against Wayfarer Studios after a defamation lawsuit dismissed claims against her. Sloane accuses them of using the court to distract from misconduct, alleging false accusations related to Blake Lively. Her motion seeks legal fees under New York’s Anti-SLAPP law, challenging misuse of defamation for PR purposes. Continue reading When the PR War Backfires: Leslie Sloane Files Devastating Anti-SLAPP Motion in Blake Lively Lawsuit
celebchai.com 