Latest news with #Liman
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Blake Lively Says Justin Baldoni Lawsuit Caused Pain and ‘Manufactured Shame' After Judge's Dismissal
Shortly after a U.S. district judge dismissed Justin Baldoni's $400 million defamation lawsuit against Blake Lively, the 'It Ends With Us' star made a rare social media statement admitting to feeling pain and 'manufactured shame' amid her ongoing legal battle. 'Last week, I stood proudly alongside 19 organizations united in defending women's rights to speak up for their safety. Like so many others, I've felt the pain of a retaliatory lawsuit, including the manufactured shame that tries to break us. While the suit against me was defeated, so many don't have the resources to fight back,' Lively wrote in her Instagram stories. 'I'm more resolved than ever to continue to stand for every woman's right to have a voice in protecting themselves, including their safety, their integrity, their dignity and their story. There are protections out there. Check out some of the incredible organizations below for resources and information.' On the story, Lively tagged a list of organizations for relevant resources and information for women to safely speak out: California Employment Lawyers Association; California Women's Law Center; CHILD USA; Coalition Against Trafficking in Women; Equal Rights Advocates; Esperanza United; Her Justice; Herunivercity Inc.; National Network to End Domestic Violence; National Organization for Women; National Organization for Women NYC; New York City Alliance Against Sexual Assault; New York Cyber Abuse Task Force; New York State Anti-Trafficking Coalition; Sanctuary for Families; Urban Resource Institute; Women's Equal Justice; and Women's Justice NOW. She signed off the note: 'With love and gratitude for the may who stood by me, many of you I know. Many of you I don't. But I will never stop appreciating or advocating for you.' On Monday, Judge Lewis J. Liman dismissed Baldoni's $400 million defamation lawsuit against Lively, her husband Ryan Reynolds and the New York Times, which first reported on the actress' claims of sexual harassment and her director's alleged retaliatory campaign against her in December. 'The alleged facts indicate that the Times reviewed the available evidence and reported, perhaps in a dramatized manner, what it believed to have happened,' Liman wrote of the Times' reporting. Lively filed a motion to have the defamation lawsuit dismissed in March, citing a 2023 law signed by Gavin Newsom in the wake of the #MeToo movement that protects victims of sexual harassment, assault and related allegations against retaliatory efforts from the accused. 'Today's opinion is a total victory and a complete vindication for Blake Lively,' Lively's lawyers, Esra Hudson and Mike Gottlieb, said in a statement Monday of Liman's dismissal. 'This '$400 million' lawsuit was a sham, and the Court saw right through it.' The New York Times also shared a statement Monday applauding Liman's dismissal of the Baldoni suit. 'We are grateful to the court for seeing the lawsuit against The New York Times for what it was: a meritless attempt to stifle honest reporting,' a spokesperson said. 'Our journalists went out and covered carefully and fairly a story of public importance, and the court recognized that the law is designed to protect just that sort of journalism. We will continue to stand up in court for our journalism and for our journalists when their work comes under attack.' The post Blake Lively Says Justin Baldoni Lawsuit Caused Pain and 'Manufactured Shame' After Judge's Dismissal appeared first on TheWrap.
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Blake Lively's Emotional Distress Claims Are DOA, Judge Rules In Win For Justin Baldoni
The trial over Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni's bitter dispute on what really happened on It Ends With Us and in the aftermath of the Sony released film doesn't start until March next year, but sometimes justice picks up the pace in the slow moving and sprawling multi-million dollar battle. As both sides took to the court docket and the media Monday to fight over how Lively would or would not withdraw her intentional emotional distress claims from her New Year's Eve filed suit against Baldoni, his Wayfarer Studios, execs and publicists, the judge shut the whole thing down Tuesday lickety-split with a rebuke of Lively's side. More from Deadline Blake Lively Insists She Is Not Dropping Emotional Distress Claims Against Justin Baldoni, Despite What His Lawyers Say & Her Lawyers Seem To Have Said Disney Layoffs Hit TV Development & Casting Executive Ranks Disney Laying Off Hundreds In TV & Film Entertainment, Corporate Finance 'The motion to compel at …is denied based on Plaintiff's representation that the relevant claims will be withdrawn,' wrote Judge Lewis J, Liman this morning in a fairly brisk order. '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,' the NYC-based federal official (and brother of director Doug Liman) added. 'The parties shall stipulate to whether the dismissal is with or without prejudice, or Lively shall renew her request by formal motion.' As a kicker, a day after Lively's lawyers exclaimed their client in not completely abandoning her emotional distress claims, Judge Liman made where he sits on all this perfectly clear: 'For avoidance of doubt, if the claims are not dismissed, the Court will preclude Lively from offering any evidence of emotional distress. SO ORDERED' After all the hoopla of yesterday's letters to the judge and weekend email exchanges between attorneys for Lively and Baldoni, lawyers and representatives for the latter were mum Tuesday, offering a telling 'no comment' on Judge Liman's move in their favor. For Lively, who now has no window to shift strategy and release her requested medical and therapy records, there was a sidestepping of her loss and a repeat of what her team put out on Monday. 'The court denied Wayfarer's motion,' said Lively lawyers Esra Hudson and Mike Gottlieb in a statement Tuesday. 'He told the parties to continue their discussions about the technicalities of how 2 of the 15 claims will be voluntarily dismissed. Ms. Lively has offered to dismiss those claims because they are no longer necessary, and she will continue to pursue emotional distress damages through other claims in her lawsuit, including sexual harassment and retaliation. In addition, the Baldoni-Wayfarer strategy of filing retaliatory claims has exposed them to expansive damages under California law. This is exactly where both parties were before the Baldoni-Wayfarer Parties rushed to file this utterly pointless motion to compel, all searching for yet another press moment.' With whispers of all not being well on the domestic violence themed IEWU, even though the pic scored at the box office, and press tour and premiere snubs, this all went public and wide when Lively on December 20 filed her sexual harassment and retaliation complaint against Baldoni and his inner circle with California's Civil Rights Department. A formal suit by her followed on December 31 with a $400 million defamation and extorsion action from the Jane the Virgin actor against Lively, her hubby Ryan Reynolds and their PR team was not long behind. In the months since, the case has ballooned to around half a dozen lawsuits, everyone trying to get dismissed from the cases and the likes of Taylor Swift, Disney, Marvel, the New York Times and others getting dragged in. Sources on both sides have repeatedly and vehemently insisted to Deadline and the courts that there is no chance of a settlement now, with the high profile Lively and Reynolds hauled way out of their carefully created comfort zone and WME-dumped Baldoni's career now dead in the water in Hollywood. The trial is set to start in NYC on March 9, 2026 in the same courthouse where the Sean 'Diddy' Combs sex-trafficking trial is taking place right now. Best of Deadline 2025-26 Awards Season Calendar: Dates For Tonys, Emmys, Oscars & More Everything We Know About 'Nobody Wants This' Season 2 So Far List Of Hollywood & Media Layoffs From Paramount To Warner Bros Discovery To CNN & More
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Federal judge blocks Trump administration efforts to stop NYC congestion pricing
NEW YORK — A Manhattan federal judge has blocked the federal government from ending congestion pricing before the end of an ongoing lawsuit — issuing a preliminary injunction against Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy and the U.S. Department of Transportation on Wednesday. The order, issued by Judge Lewis Liman, comes one day after he issued a temporary restraining order in the case, blocking any such action for two weeks. The injunction indefinitely prevents Duffy or his agency from acting on their claims that they can unilaterally revoke an authorization toll — and blocks any of the so-called 'compliance actions' Duffy has threatened — until Liman rules on the legality of USDOT's efforts to end the congestion pricing program. 'For the avoidance of doubt, (Duffy and the USDOT) are enjoined from taking any of the'compliance measures' ... including withholding federal funds, approvals, or authorizations from New York state or local agencies to enforce compliance with or implement .. (their) purported termination of the Tolling Program,' the 109-page order concludes. Speaking to reporters shortly after the order was filed Paige Graves, MTA's general counsel, said she hadn't yet read the injunction in full. 'I have not looked at the details of his decision, but it's positive news,' Graves said. The congestion toll first began in January — a requirement of New York state's 2019 Traffic Mobility Act, meant to both reduce congestion and back $15 billion in bonds toward specific MTA projects. Duffy first claimed the authority to unilaterally end the toll weeks later, in February. When the MTA sued, Duffy gave Gov. Kathy Hochul a March 21 deadline to end the toll. Duffy then extended the deadline to April 20, then to May 21. As the toll remained in place on May 21, Duffy — in a letter to Hochul — threatened to withhold federal funds for any highway project in Manhattan, refuse to approve Manhattan projects under the National Environmental Policy Act, and refuse to greenlight any funding amendments from the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council — unless Hochul ended the toll. In issuing Tuesday's restraining order, Liman said New York stood to suffer irreparable harms from the feds' demands, including the 'delay of numerous public works projects,' 'harm to the bond market' and the 'undermining (of) the authority of a sovereign state' that had democratically passed the law requiring the toll. _____
Straits Times
28-05-2025
- Business
- Straits Times
New York judge temporarily blocks White House from ending congestion pricing
The toll, which started Jan 5, charges most drivers US$9 (S$11.60) during peak traffic hours, with the goal of reducing gridlock and funding long overdue transit improvements. PHOTO: REUTERS NEW YORK – A federal court judge on May 27 temporarily blocked the Trump administration's efforts to force New York to end congestion pricing, ensuring the tolling program would remain in place until at least early next month. The move effectively keeps congestion pricing, which charges motorists to enter Manhattan south of 60th Street, running through at least June 9 by preventing the Trump administration from withholding funding for New York transportation projects if the program is not halted. President Donald Trump has vowed to kill the toll. The decision grants a key reprieve to the program, the first of its kind in the United States, since Washington ordered New York to shut it down more than three months ago. The toll, which started Jan 5, charges most drivers US$9 (S$11.60) during peak traffic hours, with the goal of reducing gridlock and funding long overdue transit improvements. Judge Lewis Liman granted the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's request for a temporary restraining order against the Trump administration after oral arguments from both sides in federal court in lower Manhattan. The authority, which runs New York City's mass transit system, operates the toll program. Mr Liman said that New York state 'would suffer irreparable harm' without a restraining order. He also left open the possibility of issuing a longer-term protective order. Mr Liman noted that the MTA 'showed a likelihood of success' in its case to maintain congestion pricing. Mr Charles Roberts, a lawyer for the Department of Transportation, said the federal government would comply with the judge's order. A spokesperson for the agency added that 'the judge's ruling today was not on the merits of our case against Hochul's class warfare, but rather a temporary pause to have more time to reach a decision.' In a February letter, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said he was revoking federal approval of the toll, because it exceeded the scope of the program that authorised it. He said it was an unfair cost to drivers, and that the toll should not primarily fund mass transit projects instead of roads. The MTA quickly sued to block Mr Duffy's intervention, arguing the program had been thoroughly reviewed, including by federal agencies, and was working. Since the toll started, traffic is down, speeds are up and the authority is on track to use the toll revenue to finance US$15 billion in critical upgrades. Despite both sides agreeing to let the case play out in court, Mr Duffy said last month that his agency would begin withholding federal approvals and funding for a range of transportation projects beginning May 28. Mr Janno Lieber, the MTA's CEO, said he welcomed the judge's decision. 'I think the message is he wants no more coercive threats and threats of punishment if we don't do what they say,' he said. In a statement, Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York said the decision was 'a massive victory for New York commuters' and reaffirmed that the state would keep the program running. Ms Roberta Kaplan, a lawyer representing the MTA, said the federal government's efforts to end congestion pricing, even after New York had gained approval, could lead to an 'eternal fog of uncertainty' for federally approved programs. Mr Kevin Willens, the MTA's chief financial officer, argued in a letter to the court that Washington's threats had put the authority in an impossible situation. The MTA could either turn off the toll, jeopardising the US$15 billion the program is expected to raise, or it could defy Mr Duffy's demands, and face the prospect of losing billions in funding for New York state highway and transit projects. Mr Michael Pollack, a professor at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law who supports congestion pricing, said that, in most cases, a temporary restraining order cannot be appealed. Though a final judgment still has to be reached in the case, he said, Mr Liman's comments and decision 'certainly bode well for the MTA going forward.' Congestion pricing still faces several legal challenges. Mr Jack L. Lester, a lawyer representing New Yorkers Against Congestion Pricing Tax, said the group would fight the program in state court, adding that the federal government's objections helped their case. But some congestion pricing supporters were hopeful that Mr Liman's decision could signal that the toll program, which had been under attack since its introduction, would soon overcome one of its most formidable challenges. 'It looks like the beginning of the end of the administration's efforts to derail this landmark transportation program,' said Mr Eric A. Goldstein, a senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, who attended the court hearing. Mr Liman has already rejected a number of other arguments against congestion pricing, in four related cases brought by opponents. NY TIMES Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Federal judge blocks Trump from stopping NYC congestion toll
May 27 (UPI) -- A federal judge on Tuesday temporarily blocked a Trump administration bid to kill New York City's congestion toll program. The program imposes a significant daily charge on vehicles entering Manhattan. Federal Judge Lewis J. Liman, of New York's U.S. southern district, issued a temporary injunction that prevented the administration from terminating the program, The New York Times first reported. The plan charges $9 for most cars entering parts of lower Manhattan. Supporters claim it cuts back on traffic and pollution, while opponents express concerns over its cost to travelers. Judge Liman, a Trump appointee, said the city would "suffer irreparable harm" without a legal remedy. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul called Liman's temporary ruling a "massive victory" for New York commuters which "vindicated" the state's right to make its own decisions. New York City comptroller and mayoral candidate Brad Lander said "six of 10 New Yorkers in the congestion zone support it," citing a recent Siena poll showing a 10% surge in statewide popularity. Trump reiterated his support for ending congestion pricing prior to his inauguration in January. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority sued the White House after the Trump administration sought to revoke the program's federal approval, initially granted by the Biden administration. U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy threatened to withhold infrastructure funding, while MTA lawyers argued that the federal government lacked the proper authority to revoke congestion pricing at a local level. On Tuesday, both opposing sides presented arguments to Judge Liman before he issued his order effective until June 9. The Trump administration argued the MTA ignored multiple deadlines to end the program, and claimed the toll disproportionately burdens low-to-medium income commuters. Outside the courthouse, U.S. Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., said revoking federal approval for such a major initiative after it had already been granted was "nearly without precedent." "I strongly believe there's no legal basis for Trump to unilaterally hold this program," he added. The MTA's 23-member board is scheduled to meet Wednesday to review updates to further utilize congestion pricing. Hochul called congestion pricing "the right solution" to support future transit investments, adding that Duffy can "issue as many letters and social media posts as he wants, but a court has blocked the Trump Administration from retaliating against New York for reducing traffic and investing in transit."
