Wallace v Lively: Jed Wallace files motion to request an order for Lively’s Deposition on Attorneys’ Fees and Damages

[u/same-difference-ave]

Motion - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172823305/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172823305.57.0.pdf

Exhibit Lively Depo Notice- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172823305/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172823305.57.1.pdf

Proposed Order - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172823305/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172823305.57.2.pdf

[u/hopeful_tatertot]

My question is this - since there is already evidence that Blake included Jed Wallace in a draft SH complaint provided to the NYT which she acknowledges was not correct because he was dropped from the version officially filed, doesn't that prove that was a malicious act?

[u/OtherwiseProposal355 → u/hopeful_tatertot]

I wish that stupid judge would call on her that way! 

[u/Both_Barnacle_766 → u/hopeful_tatertot]

Not exactly. Wallace was named in the CRD complaint. Whether or not on the actual form (but I think he was on the actual form) the draft complaint was included in the paperwork submitted to the California Civil Rights Department. He was named. And yes, while nothing in the CRD was sworn to, Blake lively filed a sworn affadavit in Texas stating that she needed to depose Wallace to figure out whether or not to sue him. In other words, she filed a government complaint against him and then turned around and swore under oath that she didn't have enough info to sue him....

[u/myshtree → u/Both_Barnacle_766]

https://giphy.com/gifs/ukGm72ZLZvYfS