On Thursday, Judge Liman granted plaintiff Blake Lively’s motion to strike a letter from the docket in her ongoing lawsuit alleging sexual harassment and retaliation claims against Justin Baldoni and his production company, in connection with the filming of It Ends With Us. The challenged letter “accused Lively, and her counsel, of engaging in witness tampering and evidence spoliation based on an undisclosed anonymous source.”
The Court, noting that it had “inherent power to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases” and the authority to “strike materials outside the pleadings that are abusive or otherwise improper,” explained that the letter “must be stricken” because it was improper and irrelevant. Specifically, the Court concluded:
The sole purpose of the Letter is to “promote public scandal” by advancing inflammatory accusations, on information and belief, against Lively and her counsel. It transparently invites a press uproar by suggesting that Lively and her counsel attempted to “extort” a well-known celebrity. Retaining the Letter on the docket would be of no use to the Court and would allow the Court’s docket to serve as a reservoir[] of libelous statements for press consumption. . . .
The Second Circuit has noted that court filings may be abused to make potentially defamatory statements without the threat of liability, given that under New York law, absolute immunity from liability for defamation exists for oral or written statements made . . . in connection with a proceeding before a court. It has advised the press accordingly that although the act of filing a document with a court might be thought to lend that document additional credibility, in fact, allegations appearing in such documents might be less credible than those published elsewhere.