Judge Rules Blake Lively's Emotional Distress Claims Against Justin Baldoni Are Officially Dead
The judge overseeing the Blake Lively vs. Justin Baldoni lawsuit has decided that the actress' claims for emotional distress are dead. The ruling comes after a tense back in forth between the dueling sides, with Baldoni's lawyers filing a motion to compel her to turn over her medical records and Lively fighting that move.
Judge Lewis Liman wrote this morning that Baldoni's motion to compel is denied 'based on Plaintiff's representation that the relevant claims will be withdrawn. 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 parties shall stipulate to whether the dismissal is with or without prejudice, or Lively shall renew her request by formal motion. For avoidance of doubt, if the claims are not dismissed, the Court will preclude Lively from offering any evidence of emotional distress.'
More from Variety
Blake Lively Abandons Claims Against Justin Baldoni of Infliction of Emotional Distress
Taylor Swift Excluded From Baldoni-Lively Narrative, as Subpoena Is Withdrawn
Blake Lively's Lawyers Fight Back Against Taylor Swift Blackmail Accusation: 'Unequivocally and Demonstrably False'
In short, Judge Liman shut down the possibility of Lively changing her mind and turning over her medical records.
Lively can choose to try to reach an agreement with Baldoni about dismissing the claims with prejudice — meaning without the right to refile — or she can roll the dice and ask the judge to dismiss the claims without an agreement, in a bid to have him dismiss them without prejudice. Either way, Lively's attorneys can no longer present evidence of her emotional distress claims.
On Monday, Baldoni's lawyers filed a motion seeking to compel the actress to sign a HIPAA release for access to therapy notes and other relevant information and referenced her desire to drop the claims rather than acquiesce.
'Instead of complying with the Medical RFPs, Ms. Lively's counsel recently advised us, in writing, that Ms. Lively is withdrawing her [infliction of emotional distress] Claims,' the filing stated. 'However, Ms. Lively has refused the Wayfarer Parties' reasonable request that the withdrawal of such claims be with prejudice. She is only willing to withdraw her claims without prejudice. In other words, Ms. Lively wants to simultaneously: (a) refuse to disclose the information and documents needed to disprove that she suffered any emotional distress and/or that the Wayfarer Parties were the cause; and (b) maintain the right to re-file her IED Claims at an unknown time in this or some other court after the discovery window has closed.'
Lively's lawyers called the filing 'a press stunt' and filed their own response that urged the court to sanction Baldoni's attorneys for the abusing the docket and requested that the motion to compel Lively be denied and struck. 'It is based on two brazenly false assertions. First, they claim that Ms. Lively has 'refused' to disclose medical and mental health information, but as counsel for the Wayfarer Parties concede, that information is relevant only to Ms. Lively's stand-alone tort-based emotional distress claims that she indicated she was withdrawing,' the Lively filing noted. 'To suggest that Ms. Lively has 'refused' to produce anything (in either her written discovery responses, in the parties' conference, or anytime thereafter) in connection with these claims is intentionally misleading to the Court and their intended audience for this false record: the public. Second, they claim that Ms. Lively has 'refused' to properly stipulate to dismissal. But, that would suggest there was any discussion or mutually known dispute as to the stipulation. As noted, there was none.'
Best of Variety
What's Coming to Netflix in June 2025
New Movies Out Now in Theaters: What to See This Week
'Harry Potter' TV Show Cast Guide: Who's Who in Hogwarts?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
‘The Simpsons' producer breaks silence on Marge Simpson's shocking death after fan backlash
D'oh! 'The Simpsons' executive producer Matt Selman has spoken out about the surprising decision to 'kill off' Marge Simpson during a flash-forward scene in the show's Season 36 finale. Although the decision caused major controversy within the hit cartoon's loyal fanbase, Selman slammed the backlash and claimed that it was 'ridiculous.' 5 'The Simpsons' executive producer Matt Selman has spoken out about the decision to 'kill off' Marge Simpson during a flash-forward scene in the show's Season 36 finale. The Hollywood Reporter via Getty Images 'Obviously, since 'The Simpsons' future episodes are all speculative fantasies, they're all different every time,' he told Variety during an interview published on Thursday, June 26. 'Marge will probably never be dead ever again. The only place Marge is dead is in one future episode that aired six weeks ago,' Selman, 53, added. ''The Simpsons' doesn't even have canon!' The episode in question, titled 'Estranger Things' and which aired on May 18, focuses on siblings Bart and Lisa Simpson as they slowly grow apart after they stop watching 'The Itchy & Scratchy Show' together. 5 Selman slammed the backlash and claimed that it was 'ridiculous.' 20thCentFox/Courtesy Everett Collection After a 35-year time jump, the audience learns that Marge has died, Bart and Lisa are estranged, and Homer Simpson, the family's dad, is living in a retirement home. A short scene from Marge's funeral shows Homer in tears while the rest of the Simpsons family stands around him. At the end of the Season 36 finale, Marge watches from Heaven as Bart and Lisa save their dad from the retirement home and reconnect over a reboot of 'The Itchy & Scratchy Show.' 5 A short scene from Marge's funeral shows Homer in tears while the rest of the Simpsons family stands around him. The Simpsons/Disney+ 'I'm so happy my kids are close again,' the Simpsons family matriarch says. It is then revealed that Marge met and married Beatles superstar Ringo Starr while in Heaven. But viewers were not happy to learn that the show's creators 'killed off' Marge Simpson, and many took to social media to express their shock and outrage. 'I haven't even watched The Simpsons in 10+ years but they really killed MARGE?!' one person wrote on X after the episode aired. 5 At the end of the Season 36 finale, Marge watches from Heaven as Bart and Lisa reconnect over a reboot of 'The Itchy & Scratchy Show.' The Simpsons/Disney+ 'What's this I'm hearing they killed Marge Simpson off?' another fan added. 'Marge Simpson is dead?' a third critic commented. 'Utter woke nonsense!' Surprisingly, Selman welcomed the backlash and claimed that it was further proof that 'The Simpsons' and its beloved characters are still relevant after 36 years on TV. 5 Selman welcomed the backlash and claimed that it was further proof that 'The Simpsons' is still relevant after 36 years on TV. AFP via Getty Images 'I guess this speaks to the fact that people care about Marge,' he told Variety. 'At the end of the day, it's probably good for business even when these ridiculous, misleading stories go viral!' 'The Simpsons,' which premiered on Fox in 1989, remains the longest-running animated show on television. Fox renewed the show, which has won 37 Emmys, for four more seasons in April.
USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
Rob McElhenney is legally changing his name, reports say. Here's why.
Say goodbye to Rob McElhenney − and hello to Rob Mac. The "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia" star, 48, has filed to legally change his name to Rob Mac, the actor and his representative confirmed to Variety and Entertainment Weekly. USA TODAY has reached out to representatives for McElhenney. The actor, who owns the soccer club Wrexham A.F.C. with Ryan Reynolds, previously revealed in an interview with Variety published in May that he was considering a name change. McElhenney said at the time that his last name is a frequent cause of confusion when he's doing business as part of his company More Better Industries. "As our business and our storytelling is expanding into other regions of the world and other languages in which my name is even harder to pronounce, I'm just going by Rob Mac," he told Variety. McElhenney, who plays Mac on "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia," said in the interview that he was concerned about disrespecting his ancestors until he discovered there's a history of his relatives also tweaking the last name. "It turns out, as I did my genealogy and I got it back, my last name has been changed so many times," he said. "As late as the '60s, there were an offshoot of the McElhenneys that changed our name. And so it's not like everybody was so precious about it prior to 1965." But the actor's wife Kaitlin Olson told Variety that their two teenage sons aren't thrilled with the idea. "The kids are really not happy about it, because they have that last name," she said. "And so do I, legally!" The change comes more than two years after Reynolds released a comedic song on McElhenney's birthday dedicated to teaching people how to say McElhenney, accompanied by a music video with clips of people butchering the pronunciation. "Sure, he's got a pretty face that people know they know," Reynolds sang. "They think they recognize him from his big-time TV show. But despite the accolades, despite the load of fame, one thing that they do not know is how to say his name."
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
From gym memberships to gun silencers, Trump's tax bill is full of surprises
WASHINGTON – The Republicans' massive policy bill would do more than extend income tax cuts, add restrictions to Medicaid and food stamps and pour funding into President Donald Trump's deportation campaign. The 1,000-plus-page bill includes several lesser-known provisions that could have an impact on Americans' lives, from the court system to the gym. The bill is likely to be one of the most important pieces of legislation passed during Trump's second term. The immense pressure from the White House to pass the bill makes it a convenient vehicle for lawmakers to add in their preferred policies and increase their chances of making it into law. Still, the bill is not set in stone: The Senate will start considering the bill next week, and the measure may undergo considerable changes. Here are nine parts of the bill you might not yet know about: Republicans included a provision in the bill that would restrict judges' ability to hold people accountable for violating court orders. It comes as some judges consider contempt rulings against the Trump administration for bypassing court orders restricting their actions. More: How Trump's clash with the courts is brewing into an 'all-out war' The legislation would bar judges from enforcing contempt rulings if they didn't first order a bond, which is commonly set at zero or not ordered in cases when people are claiming the government did something unconstitutional. Democrats have argued it's a clear attempt to bypass the courts, while Republicans say it's an incentive to stop frivolous lawsuits by requiring plaintiffs to pay in. The bill would allocate $500 million to help modernize government with the help of artificial intelligence – and would prevent states from creating new regulations to shape how AI is used or developed. It also would block dozens of states from enforcing AI regulations and oversight structures they've already implemented. There is now no federal AI regulation to take the place of state policies. More: Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' could ban states from regulating AI for a decade Tech industry leaders support the approach, warning that regulation can get in the way of innovation in a new industry. Some Republicans in the Senate, however, have raised concerns that the ban is not a good idea without a federal structure to take its place. Republicans added a provision to the bill that would get rid of a $200 registration fee for gun silencers that has existed for more than 90 years and removed a requirement for gun owners to register their silencers. More: Trump admin allows devices that let some weapons shoot as fast as machine guns "Who asked for this − was it the assassin lobby?" said Rep. Steven Horsford, D-Nevada, at a hearing on the legislation earlier in May. But Republicans argued that eliminating the fee aligns with the Second Amendment, which protects a right to bear arms, and protects gun users' hearing. The bill would qualify sports and fitness expenses as qualified medical care, which would allow people to pay for them tax-free through a Health Savings Account. People could spend up to $500 a year on gym memberships through their HSAs, or $1,000 for a married couple. More: Robert F. Kennedy now heads Trump's MAHA commission: What to know The benefit could not be used at "a private club" owned by members, or a facility that offers golf, hunting, sailing or riding facilities. The health and fitness part of the business also couldn't be "incidental to its overall function and purpose." Some people who earned a Purple Heart in the military – the decoration for service members who were wounded or killed in action – would qualify for a new income tax credit under the legislation. Purple Heart recipients who lost a portion of their Social Security disability benefits because they got a job could get a higher Earned Income Tax Credit to make up those lost Social Security benefits. The bill would create new savings accounts dubbed "Trump accounts" in which babies who are born between January 2025 and January 2029 can benefit from a one-time $1,000 payment from the federal government placed in the account. Parents would then be able to contribute up to $5,000 a year. The savings would be invested in a stock fund that would grow with the U.S. stock market. More: After 100 days, one thing is clear: The stock market is leery of Trump's tariffs The child could be able to access a portion of the money when they reach age 18 for things like education, training or buying their first house. They can use the full balance at age 30. The bill includes a change to the Pell Grant program, which provides federal aid to low-income students to attend colleges and universities. Right now, students are considered full time and qualify for the maximum amount of aid if they take 12 credits a semester. The bill would change that to 15 credits a semester, which the National College Attainment Network estimated would result in a nearly $1,500 cut in benefits for students who can't increase their course load because of work or caretaking. More: Trump orders shift on student loan management to Small Business Administration It would also end multiple existing programs for people to pay back their student loans, including a Biden-era program that tailored payment requirements to the person's income. It would be replaced with a new fixed-rate program. Migrants often move to other countries in part to send money home to their family or community abroad. The United States is the world's largest source of these transfers, known as remittances. The Republican bill would implement a 3.5% tax on those transfers, which must be paid by the person sending the money. It would include an exemption for U.S. citizens and nationals sending money abroad. The GOP proposal would charge new fees for people seeking to immigrate to the United States. Among the proposed fees: $1,000 to request asylum, $550 payments every six months for work authorization, $500 to apply for temporary protected status, $1,000 for undocumented immigrants paroled into the country, and $3,500 to sponsor unaccompanied child migrants. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: How Trump's tax bill could affect your gym membership, savings and guns
