Blake Lively and Justin BaldoniLegal teams have talked while waiting for the judge’s ruling about the actress’s application for a stronger protection order.
On Thursday, March 6, Lively’s lawyer stated that the Baldoni team “created inappropriate disclosure of information.”
“We want to stop the public publication of this information, in the case, during the discovery. The rules try to prevent the burden from being from third parties,” said the actress’s lawyer during Thursday’s sight. “We should not make the dozens of third parties go to court to protect them. We are supposed to reduce the load of third parties. The summons of third parties against the security firm that protects Lively and Reynolds should be dropped.”
Bryan FreedmanA 41 -year -old Baldoni lawyer denounced the claims in his own statement before the judge.
In a new presentation obtained by US Weekly, Blake Lively said goodbye after being accused of trying to “prevent the audience from seeing” relevant evidence “in his legal battle against Justin Baldoni. After Lively’s recent request for an improved protection order, which requested a “eyes only” stipulation to save certain information (…)
“These are issues of” only for the eyes of lawyers, “said Freedman on Thursday.” This is a case in which no one intends to harm Mrs in any way. Lively. He detailed sexual harassment claims and put it out. My clients have been awarded as guilty when it was presented. My client has the right to fight and defend. We want to accept the protection order and place the load on the part, which wants greater protection, go to court and be transparent. “
Lively’s team wanted to protect their private correspondence with “high profile individuals”.
“There is a significant possibility of irreparable damage if the marginal conversations with high -profile people unrelated to the case were to fall into the wrong hands,” said his lawyer.
Freedman, meanwhile, replied, “We cannot treat famous people and powerful people in the industry differently from other people.”
Although an official sentence was not issued on Thursday, the judge shared the “soon” decision.
The news was broken in February that Lively, 37, and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, applied for a stronger po that the standard they were awarded when she and Ends with us Cost Baldoni first filed his demands.
“As detailed in the modified complaint of Ms. Lively, Ms. Lively, her family, other members of the cast, various testimonies of facts and people who have spoken publicly in support of I was looking for “additional protections.”
Lively previously named Baldoni in a demand of December 2024, claiming that he sexually besieged her and encouraged a “hostile work environment” on the set of 2024 Ends with us. She modified his complaint Last month, detailing the alleged “emotional impact” to which he faces the legal fall.
Justin Baldoni’s lawyer, Bryan Freedman, has responded strongly to Blake Lively’s request for a gagger in the legal case of the former cost of the filming that ends with us. “The irony is not lost in anyone that Ms. Lively is so petrified in the truth that he has moved to the ghost -la Freedman (…)
“The emotional impact on Us Read. “There are days when he has struggled to get out of bed and often decides not to venture in public.”
Lively also said that he has received several violent messages from social media in the midst of legal drama. Baldoni has denied all complaints. Also he filed a slander demand Against Lively and Reynolds earlier this year. (Meanwhile, the married couple denied the accusations.)
“Anyone who receives violent messages from the anonymous parts is abundant. When Lively and his team paid by the private parts were mistakenly charged and they received threats of continuous death and visits to private houses where young children reside after their addresses were leaked to their initial complaints, “said Baldoni’s team. Us In a February statement on Lively’s protection order request. “No one should face it, especially private parties that have no means of safety details. We do not condom on the dangerous rhetoric aimed at anyone no matter the situation. “”