2 weeks Ago By Just Jared
We have the latest updates on the Blake Lively vs Justin Baldoni case. The 37-year-old actress moved to dismiss the 41-year-old actor/director’s countersuit two weeks ago, with his lawyers releasing a statement at that time. He then filed a lawsuit against his former publicist.
Now, Justin officially filed a response this week to her motion to dismiss, and her team has also responded. Keep reading to find out more..
. In his response to the motion, his attorney Bryan Freedman stated that she requested to dismiss the lawsuit for “failure to state a claim,” per People . The lawyer added that his client’s complaint provides details of “ Lively ‘s calculated efforts first to extort and manipulate” Justin and his production team at Wayfarer, “into ceding total control over the film It Ends with Us and then to defame and scapegoat them when her plan backfired.
” The lawyer notes that Justin ‘s complaint provides specific claims of defamation against Blake that are “sufficient to defeat dismissal,” adding that even if it does get dismissed, Blake is not owed attorneys’ fees and damages. Justin ‘s response also claims Blake ‘s attempt to dismiss his countersuit is her way of asking the court “to find that she is immune from any culpability for her wrongful acts.” Blake Lively ‘s lawyers have hit back at Justin and his team’s response in a statement provided to Just Jared .
“ Baldoni , Sarowitz and the rest of the Wayfarer Parties are now arguing that nobody should be protected by the sexual harassment privilege. They’re not just saying that it doesn’t apply to Ms. Lively – they’re saying it’s unconstitutional and no woman should ever have these protections,” Mike Gottlieb and Esra Hudson , her lawyers state.
“That’s right: Justin Baldoni , the man who has built his brand on supposedly speaking up for victims, believes that the First Amendment rights of victims of sexual assault and harassment to speak out should give way to the rights of perpetrators to sue their victims ‘into oblivion.’” They continued, “These defendants are so hell bent on trying to destroy Blake Lively that they are willing to shred a law designed to protect all victims just to make sure they ‘bury’ one.” A spokesperson for Blake Lively has also added, “In Freedman ’s, Baldoni ’s and Sarowitz ’s world the following allegations do not constitute harassment, at least not when Mr.
Baldoni or Mr. Heath do it.” See the mentioned allegations below.
.. The boss, Mr.
Baldoni, describing his addiction to pornography to his employee. The boss, Mr. Baldoni, describing in detail his sex life to his employee, including the times he has had sex without asking for consent or did not listen when they said no.
The boss, Mr. Baldoni, making degrading and sexual comments to his employee including describing his genitalia and telling his employee that she looks sexy and hot. The boss, Mr.
Baldoni, asking his employee about her sex life and about her orgasms with her partner. The boss, Mr. Heath, showing his employee a video of his naked wife giving birth without first asking if that was ok.
The boss, Mr. Baldoni, as a head of a studio, director of a movie starring himself, improvising intimacy with his employee costar without first asking if it was ok, or providing any warning or mentioning before doing, such as sucking and biting on her lip, kissing her forehead, rubbing his face and mouth against her neck, putting his thumb to her mouth and flicking her lower lip, and caressing her and telling her how good she smells. All not only without asking first but without any intimacy coordinator on set during those incidents.
The boss, Mr. Baldoni, as a head of a studio, director of the movie, casting his best friend who has “an MFA in acting from UCLA” to place his face between his employee’s legs for an incredibly intimate birth scene. The boss, Mr.
Heath, refusing to turn around when asked to because his employee was having body makeup removed and instead continued to stare directly at her while she was topless. The bosses, Mr. Baldoni and Mr.
Heath, thinking it was ok to continually enter their employee’s private trailer without any notice or consent – including while breastfeeding – because she sometimes breastfed on set after taking the necessary steps to make herself comfortable, cover herself and ensure the conditions were appropriate..
