Delivered, Baldoni lawyers stand out before the court for a protective order

• Blake Lively asked for an improved protective order in his legal battle with Justin Baldoni.
• A lawyer for Lively and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, suggested that the Baldoni camp could flee.
• “There is an insatiable appetite for any information on this case,” said lawyer before the court.

Blake Lively’s lawyer strives to keep evidence away from Justin Baldoni and, by proxy, the press.

Lively and her husband’s lawyer Ryan Reynolds have suggested that Baldoni and her camp can disclose sensitive information in the middle of their current legal fight.

Couples lawyer, Merly Goverksi, raised the alarm on Thursday when she did her business to a Manhattan judge on the reason why she thinks that an improved protection order is necessary to protect the discovery process in duel proceedings between them and Baldoni.

“There is an insatiable appetite for any information on this affair, whatever its salar. We have even seen the most benign and benign information becoming fodder at tabloids,” said Goverksi, the US Lewis Liman district judge during a virtual court hearing.

The lawyer said that there would be assignments to “third parties involving third parties” and “we believe that there is a significant chance of irreparable damage if a marginally relevant communication with third level people who are not linked to the case should fall into bad hands”.

Lively continued Baldoni – its director -postar in “IT Ends with US” – in December, accusing him of sexual harassment on the film set and of engaging in an online defamation campaign of reprisals against her. The other accused of the trial include the Baldoni production company, Wayfarer Studios, its producer colleagues and its publicists.

Baldoni, who denied the allegations, then contraindicated and Reynolds in a defamation complaint. The two cases were consolidated in one.

Goverksi argued Thursday that a more robust protection prescription with a category “Attorneys Eyes Only” for confidential and sensitive discovery equipment is necessary in the case not only to protect people not directly involved in the case, but also to maintain medical information and the safety measures of people involved out of the public’s eyes.

The lawyer said that an example she imagined would be subject to discovery and would cause irreparable damage to disclose the specific security measures that live and that Reynolds “took to protect themselves and protect their families from this reprisal campaign.”

“We do not see any reason why the parties themselves have to know the specific details on Ms. Lively and Mr. Reynolds’ security measures they have set up,” said Goverksi.

In a letter to the judge last month on the proposed protection order, lawyers for Lively and Reynolds said that family members, and other people who have spoken to support they have already received “violent, profane, sexist and threatening communications”.

Baldoni lawyer Bryan Freedman argued during the hearing of the court on Thursday that the judge’s protection order was sufficient as it is.

“I think it is rather offensive than anyone who suggests that we would not neglect a protective order,” Freedman told the judge. “In fact, we are in favor of the prescription for the protection of the models of the Court. We believe that it is enough to protect the parties.”

Freedman called “nonsense” that the Baldoni legal team would even care about animated life and Reynolds managed their security.

“No one is interested in what someone’s safety does,” said Freedman.

Goverksi said that if it was Freedman’s position, he should withdraw the assignment, he sat on the security couple’s security company “for all documents and communications concerning Lively and Reynolds and in Lively and Reynolds”.

A spokesperson for Lively told Business Insider in a statement after the hearing: “All parties agree that there is sensitive information in this case which should be protected from public disclosure – the order proposed by the Wayfarer parties would do so.”

“The dispute is to know if a close category of already non-public information should only be accessible to lawyers rather than the games,” said the spokesperson, adding: “This additional protection would guarantee that defendants who have committed to spending $ 100 million to destroy Ms. Lively and his family do not have access to information that only lawyers must see.”

Baldoni’s lawyer did not immediately respond to a request for comments from BI.