Judge Blocks Emotional Distress Evidence in Blake Lively's Case Against Justin Baldoni
Blake Lively's legal battle with Justin Baldoni has taken a sharp turn, as a federal judge has now ruled that she cannot move forward with her emotional distress claims. The decision follows a back-and-forth between both parties over Lively's refusal to release medical records.
Blake Lively's legal battle with Justin Baldoni took a significant turn when a federal judge ruled that her emotional distress claims cannot proceed and barred her from presenting related evidence at trial.
On Tuesday, Judge Lewis Liman ruled that her claims related to emotional distress would not move forward, after Lively's attorneys indicated they would be dropping them. The decision came in response to a motion from Baldoni's legal team, who had pushed the court to compel Lively to release private medical records, including therapy notes.
Judge Lewis Liman denied the motion to compel those records, citing Lively's intent to withdraw the related claims. He wrote, 'The motion to compel … is denied based on Plaintiff's representation that the relevant claims will be withdrawn.' However, the judge also made it clear that if the claims aren't formally dismissed, Lively won't be allowed to submit any evidence related to emotional distress.
The judge also addressed Blake Lively's attempt to have her claims dismissed without prejudice, saying, 'Lively's request that 'because the parties have agreed to dismiss Ms. Lively's tenth and eleventh causes of action…the Court exercise its inherent authority and authority under Rule 15 to dismiss them without prejudice' is denied without prejudice to renewal.' He further instructed both parties to either jointly 'stipulate to whether dismissal is with or without prejudice,' or have Lively submit a formal motion.
Although Justin Baldoni's lawyers did not respond to the ruling, Lively's attorneys, Esra Hudson and Mike Gottlieb, issued a pointed statement. They called Baldoni's motion 'utterly pointless.' They added that while the standalone emotional distress claims are being withdrawn, Lively still plans to seek emotional distress damages through other claims in the lawsuit, such as sexual harassment and retaliation. (via Variety)
Originally reported by Disheeta Maheshwari on ComingSoon.
The post Judge Blocks Emotional Distress Evidence in Blake Lively's Case Against Justin Baldoni appeared first on Mandatory.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Minnesota AG Keith Ellison says current executive overreach is new in country's history
Jun. 6---- Although state attorneys general and other agencies are currently prevailing in court rulings against what they argue is executive overreach by the administration, there is still a concern the targeted agencies and departments — created by — may be forever damaged by the administration's attempts to dismantle them. Minnesota Attorney General says he hopes that is not the case, but he does not know. "I don't think anybody really knows," Ellison told the West Central Tribune in an interview Thursday after a presentation he gave in Willmar. "Our country's never been through this. I mean, from (President George) Washington until now, we've never had a president who's decided, 'I'm going to wreck the administrative state. I'm going to persecute the press by suing them. I'm going to persecute law firms. I'm going to ignore the courts.' This is new." Since taking office on Jan. 20 through May 23, Trump signed 157 executive orders, compared to the 220 executive orders he signed during his entire first term in office, according to For further comparison, signed 162 executive orders during his four-year term, signed 277 executive orders in his eight years in office and signed 291 executive orders during his eight years in office. During Ellison's presentation Thursday at the League of Women Voter of the Willmar Area monthly "Hot Topics" event, he explained the constitutional way to accomplish what the Trump administration is trying to accomplish — by going through Congress. "It's true that you can change birthright citizenship if you change the 14th Amendment," Ellison said. Trump signed an executive order on Jan. 20, his first day in office, to end birthright citizenship for certain people born in the U.S., which is currently being challenged in the courts. "You can even abolish the Department of Education if you introduce a bill in the House and in the Senate, you go through the committee process and then the president signs that bill into law," Ellison continued. "But what you cannot do, and which it is absolutely not conservative to do, is to just get rid of the Department of Education through an edict or proclamation, also known as the executive orders. ... You've got to operate constitutionally." He said he is not aware of another time in American history when the head of state used unconstitutional action to dismantle every American institution, which he and 23 other attorneys general are working hard to prevent through lawsuits. Ellison gave numerous examples of the issues that have been caused by the Trump administration's executive orders, including chaos and confusion. One of the lawsuits brought forth by the attorneys general is against the Trump administration's tariffs. Ellison served in the U.S. House from 2007 to 2019, including 12 years on the Financial Services Committee. "I'm not 100% against tariffs," he said. "I think there are times to use tariffs, but you don't have them on again, off again, 50% today, 100% tomorrow, back down to zero, back up to 50%," Ellison said. "... That is the surest way to ruin the economy." The Trump administration has also been sued over placing conditions on federal funding if local law enforcement agencies do not enforce immigration laws. Ellison explained that local law enforcement has its own jobs to do and the federal government is responsible for enforcing immigration laws. "I will not interfere with (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) if you have a judicial warrant to arrest somebody and put them in removal proceedings," Ellison said. "I demand, as an American, that they have due process rights, but I'm not going to get in the way of it if that's the legal process." Another lawsuit making its way through the courts is regarding the impoundment of federal education funding for K-12 schools that are teaching diversity, equity and inclusion. He pointed out that Secretary of Education Linda E. McMahon was asked if teaching African American history would be a violation and she said that she did not know. "Well, of course, she doesn't know, because it's not defined in law anywhere," he said. "There is no working definition (of diversity, equity and inclusion) that you can apply across the board as to what they say you can't do." The Trump administration attempt to force voters to prove their citizenship before being allowed to cast a ballot will affect millions of eligible voters who may find it difficult to produce their birth certificate or or other needed documentation if they have changed their name. Ellison said he used to be an advocate for a nationwide voting system to ensure uniform voting throughout the country. "I now no longer think that's a good idea, because the saving grace of this moment is to have 50 different voting systems," he said. " ... In a way, this ended up being a strength, because he cannot just go to some federal voting agency and say, 'Do it my way.' It's state by state." The Trump administration is also being sued in relation to transgender rights, with which not everyone in the audience would agree, Ellison noted during his presentation Thursday. When U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi threatened to sue Minnesota over its law allowing transgender youth to play for the sports team with which they identify, Ellison sued first. He said he believes that youth sports is about hanging out with friends, learning sportsmanship and learning not to quit. "I believe sports are good for kids, and kids should get to play. That's where I'm coming from," he said. He is also suing the Trump administration over its threat to pull congressionally-approved federal funding for medical institutions that provide gender-affirming care.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Abrego Garcia indicted, returned to US to face federal charges
Kilmar Abrego Garcia is back in the U.S. to face a federal indictment in Tennessee accusing him of helping to transport across the country hundreds of people who had entered the U.S. illegally. Abrego Garcia's return to the U.S. marks a surprising turnaround in the mistakenly deported Maryland man's legal saga after months of litigation seeking to bring him back. Since sending Abrego Garcia to a Salvadoran mega-prison in March, the Trump administration has defied a judge's orders to return him to the U.S. or communicate their efforts to do so. The two-count indictment alleges the Beltsville resident conspired with others for nearly a decade to transport people, as well as narcotics and firearms 'on occasions,' in more than 100 trips from Texas to Maryland and other states. Experts have warned of a ongoing constitutional crisis due to the Trump administration's failure to grant Abrego Garcia a hearing or abide by U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis' rulings. However, his long-awaited return could mitigate any showdown between the executive and judicial branches. Justice Department officials said at a Friday afternoon news conference that they believed Abrego Garcia's indictment and return made the matter moot. 'Abrego Garcia has landed in the U.S. to face justice,' U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said Friday. She said that El Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele, who has previously refused to release Abrego Garcia, had agreed to return the 29-year-old after being presented with an arrest warrant. He is charged in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee with 'conspiracy to unlawfully transport illegal aliens for financial gain' and 'unlawful transportation of illegal aliens for financial gain.' In a filing to keep him detained in the U.S., the Justice Department said that Abrego Garcia's potential sentence, if he is convicted, 'goes well beyond the remainder of [his] life.' Abrego Garcia was stopped by Tennessee's highway patrol in 2022 while transporting eight people. Officers suspected that the matter 'was a human trafficking incident,' according to a Department of Homeland Security document, though Abrego Garcia was not initially detained or charged. That traffic stop appears to be at least part of the basis for the indictment, which was filed under seal in late May and cites the encounter. The indictment also accuses Abrego Garcia of being a member of MS-13. Since his deportation in March, which Xinis ruled was illegal, Abrego Garcia has been held in El Salvador's Terrorism Confinement Center as well as in a smaller prison in Santa Ana. Trump administration officials had said that he was 'never coming back' to the U.S., despite a Supreme Court ruling affirming Xinis' order to facilitate his return. For months, the Trump administration has tried to publicly justify Abrego Garcia's removal, repeatedly accusing him of presenting a public danger. In April, Bondi posted a series of documents on X, including a 2019 'gang field interview sheet' from Prince George's County Police that cited a Chicago Bulls hat and a shirt as being 'indicative of the Hispanic gang culture.' The only other piece of corroborating evidence was a confidential source, according to the document, and members of the public have called the integrity of the police officer who authored the report into question. The 2019 investigation led to an immigration hearing, in which a judge decided Abrego Garcia could remain in the U.S. because 'it was more likely than not' he would be subjected to gang violence if deported back to his native El Salvador, which he left as teenager. The former Maryland resident's return may avoid the ugliest possible outcomes in his civil case, where the government has flouted Xinis' repeated orders for his return. 'It's at least a distraction,' and possibly a chance for the government to vindicate itself, said Carl Tobias, a constitutional law professor at the University of Richmond. But we're 'a long way from there,' and it's difficult to know what will happen in either courthouse, he noted. The indictment itself, he said, could go either way, depending on what evidence the Justice Department presents. On X, Congressman Andy Harris, a Trump ally and the lone Republican in the Maryland congressional delegation, said that returning Abrego Garcia, whom he called an 'already deported illegal alien criminal,' to the U.S. is 'a waste of hard-earned taxpayer dollars,' implying that he will be deported again after he stands trial. Maryland Democrats said that Abrego Garcia's return, despite being under criminal charges, was a victory. In a statement Friday afternoon, U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen, the Maryland Democrat who first traveled to El Salvador to visit Abrego Garcia, said that the Trump administration has 'finally relented to our demands for compliance with court orders and with the due process rights.' 'As I have repeatedly said, this is not about the man, it's about his constitutional rights – and the rights of all,' Van Hollen said. 'The administration will now have to make its case in the court of law, as it should have all along.' 'Kilmar Abrego Garcia should not have been deported,' U.S. Sen. Angela Alsobrooks, a Democrat, said. 'Even the Supreme Court demanded this President follow the law and return him to the U.S. It is right that due process will be afforded to him.' In an interview Friday on CNN, Maryland U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin said he did not know any Democrats who've defended Abrego Garcia's conduct because to this point, he has not been charged with a crime. However, Raskin said since his deportation, Abrego Garcia has been entitled to a proper court procedure. 'It's not a moral question, it's a legal question,' the Montgomery County Democrat said. To accentuate his point, Raskin compared Abrego Garcia's case to President Donald Trump's criminal prosecution last year in New York. 'He had every element of due process along the way,' Raskin said of the president. Democratic Rep. Glenn Ivey, who also traveled to El Salvador last month to see Abrego Garcia but was denied access, said in a CNN interview Friday that the Maryland father's return was likely due to the White House 'getting a lot of heat' about his case. 'It's good they could bring him back, and hopefully they'll bring back the other 250 plus Venezuelans and others who are in this odd status of deportation, even though they haven't done anything or been convicted of any criminal activity,' said Ivey, who represents the Maryland district where Abrego Garcia resides. Shortly after the indictment was unsealed, the Justice Department asked for Xinis to dissolve a preliminary injunction ordering Abrego Garcia's return, adding that the 'underlying case should be dismissed.' In that case, Xinis recently permitted the plaintiffs to seek sanctions against the U.S. government. She had not made any new rulings as of Friday afternoon. _____ (Baltimore Sun reporters Hannah Gaskill, Luke Parker and Ben Mause contributed to this story.) _____
Washington Post
7 hours ago
- Washington Post
Appeals court hands AP an incremental loss in its attempt to regain its access to Trump events
Digging deep into free-speech precedents in recent American history, a federal appeals panel handed The Associated Press an incremental loss on Friday in its continuing battle with the Trump administration over access by its journalists to cover presidential events. By a 2-1 margin, judges on the three-judge U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington granted Trump a stay in enforcement of a lower-court ruling that the administration had improperly punished the AP for the content of its speech — in this case not renaming the Gulf of Mexico to Trump's liking.
