Flaawsome Talk with Kjersti Flaa - Blake Lively has NO Chance !!

00:00:00.000 So you do think that she has a chance?

00:00:01.980 She has a chance. I think she has two chances, slim and none.

00:00:06.900 Hi and welcome to Flossom Talk. I'm Sjastri Floor, journalist, Hollywood truth teller,

00:00:14.860 and your voice of reason in a town built on delusion.

00:00:18.700 Okay, I have my favorite lawyer on today, John Genga.

00:00:23.820 John was the one who defended me against Blake Lively when she filed a subpoena against me

00:00:29.560 to get access to everything in my google account she did the same thing to 106 other journalists

00:00:35.720 and content creators and john stepped up and defended me and it ended up with blake lively

00:00:41.060 dropping the subpoena and today i wanted to ask his reaction on the latest ruling by the judge

00:00:47.560 if he's surprised by it and if he can explain a little bit more about what we can expect moving

00:00:53.320 forward. And if he thinks Blake Lively's lawyers overstepped. John Genga, my favorite attorney in

00:01:02.000 the entire world, is back to explain things for us. Thank you so much, John. It's great to see you

00:01:07.700 again. Well, thanks for having me back. And, you know, great work on covering this whole case. I

00:01:13.980 mean, you've been doing a great job. And, you know, a lot of what you've been saying has kind

00:01:18.840 of been vindicated now by the court. That's certainly one way to look at it. But I mean,

00:01:22.840 you've done a really great job. You've done a fair job. You've done hard work. You've spent a lot

00:01:27.640 of time researching and understanding the case. And I think it's been a great service to people.

00:01:37.740 So thank you for doing that. Thank you. And thank you so much. John was the one who defended me

00:01:43.840 against Blake Lively's subpoena, and he fought it and we won. So this is kind of a second wind,

00:01:51.060 I would say. So what was your reaction when you saw the news yesterday? What was your like first

00:01:57.400 instant reaction? My first reaction was to go to the court file and actually look at it. That was

00:02:02.880 my first reaction because you don't necessarily know when you see a headline or even a brief

00:02:11.800 story when something first comes out, how accurate it is or, you know, how well it presents what

00:02:18.260 really happened, what the decision really was. So that's what I wanted to do. And I got a I got a

00:02:24.140 good sense of it pretty quickly, because the way that the court presented its reasoning was really

00:02:29.880 clear. And it presented up front what its conclusions were. And so I thought that was

00:02:36.040 very helpful. And, you know, I needed to dig in deeper to understand, you know, the court's

00:02:42.780 reasoning. But I do understand what the court did, why the court did what it did. I was pretty

00:02:47.540 surprised by, you know, the extent to which the plaintiff tried to go in some of her claims that

00:02:54.700 were really had a lot of a lot of legal problems right out of the gate. I think Manette must have

00:03:02.420 realized that, but made some conscious decisions to pursue certain claims because they had some

00:03:10.040 advantages if they could keep them alive. But they just couldn't do it despite their best efforts.

00:03:16.980 What were those, by the way, the ones that you thought were just like, why are they, this is so weak?

00:03:21.580 Well, the ones that really depended upon, for example, her claim status as an employee, which was really a tough reach, particularly given documents.

00:03:34.480 I can't remember what she called it.

00:03:36.560 The PGA letter?

00:03:38.100 Yes, that's the one.

00:03:39.340 Yeah, she sent it to the PGA, right, to try to get admitted to the union, I guess, to show that she has done all of these things that are so contrary to what it means to be an employee. And she had no choice but to admit that, yes, I adopt all of these. Everything I said in here was true. She had to say that.

00:04:00.880 And the judges said, look, when you look at all of this, you're just you're just not an employee.

00:04:06.640 That's just not the way these things work.

00:04:08.540 So and if you if you believe you did all these things, there's no way.

00:04:13.300 And they should have known that you're saying, Manat, representing her, should have known that that was such a risk.

00:04:20.040 They tried to bring these these claims under the California law, FEHA, the Fair Employment and Housing Act,

00:04:25.080 Because there are certain advantages in terms of, you know, you get more, you get greater damages, more attorney's fees, things like that.

00:04:34.200 So they made a calculated decision to do something that was risky and unlikely.

00:04:40.780 And at the end of the day, they couldn't carry the day.

00:04:44.920 But they would have had to inform Blake lively about this.

00:04:47.940 So she also must have known there was a risk and willing to take that.

00:04:50.980 Do attorneys do that? 0.91

00:04:51.920 Are they or could they just say, let's fight this, we'll do it this way?

00:04:55.600 Or would she know about this risk, you think?

00:04:58.160 She should know about the risk.

00:04:59.780 I would certainly tell my client about the risk.

00:05:03.900 I would say, look, this is a long shot, but here are the reasons why we would do it.

00:05:09.160 And here are the reasons why we think it's not likely to succeed, but it's worth the shot.

00:05:15.360 If they don't have the full information, they cannot make the best decision for themselves.

00:05:21.920 And sometimes my clients will accept it.

00:05:24.620 Sometimes they won't.

00:05:26.320 But my job is once the client makes the decision, any lawyer's job is once the client makes

00:05:31.340 a decision, you got to do the best you can to make it work.

00:05:34.560 That's the lawyer's job.

00:05:36.140 So, you know, whether the lawyers thought they had a good case or not, they had to do

00:05:40.800 everything in their power to present their, you know, their best case.

00:05:44.620 And they did that and didn't fly in certain on certain claims.

00:05:50.520 on, I guess, 10 of the 13 claims.

00:05:53.400 That's a lot of things that didn't fly.

00:05:55.420 So the three that she has left now,

00:05:57.040 as far as I understand, is retaliation

00:05:59.280 and retaliation for that 17-point list

00:06:03.460 that she sent to them and got them to sign

00:06:06.420 to say that I won't return to work

00:06:08.900 unless all of these things are not happening again.

00:06:12.580 And then they agreed to that.

00:06:14.600 And my big question here is,

00:06:16.440 it's going to be hard for her to prove 0.99

00:06:19.140 that the retaliation happened because she spoke up in those 17 points, because that's a long time

00:06:25.620 in between when that 17-point list was presented and signed until they allegedly started smearing

00:06:34.100 her. How is she going to, I mean, isn't that just like very far-fetched? Because that happened like

00:06:40.260 88 months in, there was like eight months between, so why didn't they retaliate then?

00:06:45.500 And why did they wait until the movie came out, which was, you know, they spent so much money, they put so much money into this movie.

00:06:54.320 And for them to smear the lead actress would make no sense because that could really hurt their own film.

00:07:01.060 So, right, this is what she has to prove now, right?

00:07:03.900 Yeah. So that's where, right, that's where she's going to have trouble potentially with the jury. 1.00

00:07:09.940 I mean, the court said, look, a jury could decide that that this was motivated by those improper reasons and therefore find in her favor.

00:07:21.620 So he said he couldn't decide as a matter of law.

00:07:24.940 There were there was conflicting evidence and that it had to be up to a jury to decide.

00:07:30.800 But the hurdle that she faces now is that she has to, you know, convince a jury that those were the reasons that this was done, number one.

00:07:40.720 Number two, I think an even bigger thing, which I would be worried about and I would be telling her about if I were a lawyer, is causation.

00:07:50.660 did what the defendants do actually cause her reputational harm

00:08:00.720 as opposed to, is it her own reputation that caused her harm?

00:08:05.660 And there's going to be a lot of juicy and fun bits

00:08:11.100 for Brian Freeman to get into on cross-examination.

00:08:15.780 And I don't know that she's going to want to go through that.

00:08:19.860 But I wouldn't if I were her.

00:08:23.100 They're going to trot out witnesses that are going to say, you know, yeah, she's difficult. 0.98

00:08:28.040 She's got a reputation of being difficult to work with. 1.00

00:08:31.020 She makes demands. 1.00

00:08:32.400 She's a diva. 1.00

00:08:33.380 She's this.

00:08:33.860 She's that.

00:08:34.560 And I'm not saying she is or she isn't, by the way.

00:08:36.620 I'm just saying these are the kind of things that are going to come out at the trial if there is one.

00:08:42.060 And that's a whole other topic, I suppose, that you may want to look into is what, you know, if we have a crystal ball, what are the parties going to do now?

00:08:53.120 What should be the next step?

00:08:55.440 You know, I certainly have some thoughts as to what I would do if I were in either of their positions, which is basically the same thing, really.

00:09:02.480 I would get on the phone with the other side and say, let's settle.

00:09:08.060 Let's pack up our toys and go home.

00:09:10.120 And I would take the high road from either direction.

00:09:13.660 I'd say, look, if I'm Baldoni's lawyer, I'd say, look, Blake probably really believed

00:09:18.100 a lot of this stuff, or maybe she did, or maybe she was going through a hard time.

00:09:22.020 You know, she gave it her best shot.

00:09:23.980 She's entitled to do that.

00:09:25.240 She's now not in a good position.

00:09:27.100 But, you know, my client believes in forgiveness and kindness, and people do things for the

00:09:32.100 best intentions.

00:09:33.140 And so he's willing to let sleeping dogs lie.

00:09:36.560 And from the other side, I would say, I don't know what I was thinking.

00:09:40.640 I'm really sorry.

00:09:41.860 I got carried away.

00:09:43.880 I don't want to do this anymore.

00:09:45.120 This isn't good for anybody.

00:09:46.440 It's not good for Hollywood.

00:09:47.900 I think she's going to say, I want to focus on my family now.

00:09:51.020 Yes.

00:09:51.460 Isn't that what they always say?

00:09:52.360 And by the way, yeah, no, and that works.

00:09:57.020 That's something that works.

00:09:59.500 I mean, people do that all the time in Hollywood.

00:10:01.600 They drop out of sight for a while.

00:10:03.640 They do focus on their family.

00:10:04.980 And Hollywood's very forgiving. People come back.

00:10:07.940 Should be interesting. Let's go back to that retaliation for a second, because I find it interesting.

00:10:12.100 I read about my little bump video that was also mentioned by the judge.

00:10:16.540 And he was saying that they were or he implied that they had asked their team to amplify that video and other videos.

00:10:26.220 So if they did that, if they amplified some videos that were negative for Blake, they were amplifying only things that were already out there.

00:10:35.840 They didn't make any content to harm her.

00:10:38.800 Would that even be an argument for them that they could say, oh, they amplified positive stuff about Boldoni and this interview with Blake Lively seemed like she was a bully?

00:10:51.200 Well, yeah, but the court said there was enough there that a jury could decide that by doing that, they crossed the line. You know, there was, you're right, there was already that stuff out there.

00:11:07.180 They had all these experts get, you know, file declarations that said, well, based on this, there was a, I found 30% more than I would have expected to find under normal circumstances. And that suggests to me that there was some effect of this, you know, promotion of these, you know, negative stories about Ms. Lively. So therefore, I think there is a causal link.

00:11:32.020 So, you know, an expert is basically someone who, if you pay them enough money, will say what you want them to say.

00:11:37.840 Exactly. I read those expert reports and that's exactly what I thought.

00:11:41.500 They're told beforehand, this is the result we want, just make it happen.

00:11:45.040 And then they will just like put together some numbers and, you know, whatever, spin things around.

00:11:49.780 What do you think now with these three claims she has left?

00:11:52.260 You know, she originally she asked for like all these damages on top of each other. 1.00

00:11:57.240 So it ended up being like six hundred and fifty million dollars or whatever.

00:12:00.460 And she's going to have to say, as you say, she's going to have to show that it really harmed her and that what they did really harmed her.

00:12:06.980 So how much money would anything like this, like what would this be worth?

00:12:11.300 What's left of this lawsuit now?

00:12:12.980 You know, the retaliation claims, they do go to her reputation. So it goes to her employability money that she's lost because she can't be employed as she used to be because of the image that's being promoted negatively about her. And so there's value there. I mean, she's a highly paid actress. I was surprised that she only made what she made on this movie, by the way. It wasn't a huge amount of money that she made.

00:12:42.500 But for bigger pictures, she'd be making a lot more money, and there might be a lot of opportunities that she would have had that she doesn't have now. 0.99

00:12:50.660 Now, those are always difficult to prove.

00:12:52.500 I mean, you have to prove – I mean, it's kind of speculative in a way that, oh, yeah, we would normally expect her to have gotten, you know, XYZ parts at $10 million a pop, you know, twice or three times a year.

00:13:05.360 So she's lost, you know, $50 million a year for the next five years discounted to present value, you know, whatever.

00:13:11.720 But then but then they would have to prove that she lost that because of what happened during the promotion and not what happened after she filed a lawsuit, because it's like, yeah, no, it's going to be hard.

00:13:23.300 It's going to be hard. I, you know, and again, at the end of the day, it's the lawyers that are making the money here.

00:13:30.120 So this is not good for any of the parties.

00:13:34.040 They are distracted from what they do for a living.

00:13:37.560 They should get back to what they do and raise their families, get some jobs, you know, and move on.

00:13:47.240 How much do you estimate that her team could have, you know, what they have charged her until this point?

00:13:53.620 I mean, she has two big firms, I think, working for her.

00:13:56.680 Oh, yeah. No, she's paying over a million dollars a month in legal fees. 1.00

00:14:01.700 A month?

00:14:02.000 Easily. Yeah. Yeah.

00:14:03.420 Wow.

00:14:04.040 Yeah.

00:14:04.480 Oh, wow.

00:14:05.220 I mean, even in the short time I was helping you on the case, I was dealing with a number of different lawyers at Manette Phelps.

00:14:12.200 And then I think I told you I went to Perez Hilton's hearing.

00:14:16.860 Yes.

00:14:17.040 And a bunch of other lawyers that were from the other law firm.

00:14:21.320 So, and they're charging, they're all charging over a thousand bucks an hour.

00:14:25.080 So there's, you know, so there's like a dozen of them a day all charging over a thousand bucks an hour.

00:14:34.160 That adds up pretty quickly.

00:14:35.600 I mean, like you said, if you were them, you would tell them, you know, settle this.

00:14:39.640 What do you think?

00:14:40.740 What are the chances now that they're going to settle?

00:14:43.620 You know, it's hard to say.

00:14:46.000 She has been so adamant in public about this.

00:14:51.700 it's going to be hard for her to kind of admit that she you know might have gone a little too

00:14:58.820 far so she might feel that she has to keep going i don't know it's very difficult that's what i

00:15:04.500 think too because also she said today by the way i don't know if you saw that she said i look forward

00:15:08.920 to telling my story uh to in front of a jury basically and i feel like you know i don't think

00:15:16.120 she does by the way no no one would do that no one looks forward to be on a stand i'm guessing

00:15:21.440 That is just like such a stressful, stressful thing, especially if you know your case is so weak, as she knows.

00:15:28.740 But the fact that she said she's looking forward to that and as we know, so much more could come out in this case during trial and what she, you know, when she has to sit there and defend all of this in front of a jury.

00:15:42.540 And as I'm guessing, because now there are no individuals from Justin Baldoni's side, Justin Baldoni's out, Jamie Heath is out, Steve Saris, Jennifer Abel, and Lisa Nathan.

00:15:52.640 All the individuals are out, yeah.

00:15:53.740 So do they even have to be in court, these individuals, or could they send people from the Wayfair parties or others to represent them?

00:16:03.540 Well, they're going to be witnesses for sure. I mean, they can be subpoenaed. And I mean, there's still parties to the case that could be they could be made to testify, but they don't have to be in court. I mean, I would be surprised at this point if maybe they will be. Who knows? I mean, maybe Baldoni will be in court the whole time. Who knows?

00:16:21.300 Maybe he will be enjoying it, watching her stand there and sweat.

00:16:27.500 I don't know.

00:16:27.920 That doesn't strike me as his personality, but from what I've heard about him,

00:16:31.980 I think he thinks this is kind of sad that this is happening.

00:16:37.700 I think he thinks it's sad for her that this is happening,

00:16:40.320 that she's put herself out there and arguably done all this to herself

00:16:45.560 to hurt her reputation.

00:16:47.660 Based on what I've heard about the guy, I don't think he wishes that on anyone.

00:16:50.620 So I can see where, and this is where the judge said, I can see where a reasonable juror could find in her favor on some of these claims.

00:17:04.040 So you do think that she has a chance?

00:17:06.200 She has a chance. I think she has two chances, slim and none.

00:17:10.420 Slim and none.

00:17:11.500 Yeah, I mean, I think.

00:17:13.160 So even though the judge said a jury could find this, it just means that he thinks, OK, this is not up to me.

00:17:18.780 it's up to a jury to decide. Not that, oh, she has a good case here that the jury will probably

00:17:24.020 agree with her, basically, right? Yeah, right. No, he doesn't say that at all. And he is very

00:17:29.600 careful to make clear that he's not saying that. And several points to the opinion, he says, look,

00:17:34.840 I'm not saying a jury is going to find this. I'm saying a jury could find this. And I'm not,

00:17:40.700 by going through all this, you know, what I think doesn't matter, he says. Many times he says that.

00:17:46.220 But, you know, in certain facts, he says this is not relevant because there are certain there's certain evidence he's probably going to keep out.

00:17:55.220 I can't remember what it all is because of over the course of 152 page opinion.

00:18:01.820 I just and I'm not as close to the cases as you have been because you're covering it every day.

00:18:07.080 But there's certain evidence is going to be kept out, most likely because it was not considered relevant.

00:18:13.200 Freeman will make what's called motions in limine to keep certain evidence out.

00:18:18.140 Manat will do the same thing on their side.

00:18:22.280 So, you know, what a jury ultimately hears, you know, we'll see.

00:18:27.440 I wouldn't, if I'm her lawyers, I'm not looking forward to trying this case.

00:18:33.880 I'm really not.

00:18:35.160 No, I wouldn't be either.

00:18:36.640 I wouldn't either.

00:18:37.680 Defending something like this must be like such a, oh my gosh.

00:18:41.820 Yeah. Even though Blake Lively is looking forward to being on that stand, her lawyers are definitely not looking forward to that. 0.98

00:18:47.960 I don't. And by the way, I don't think she's looking forward to being on the stand. She's saying that.

00:18:52.360 But and she's, you know, look, in Hollywood, obviously, there's the whole public facing aspect of a case that's not as important in your typical, you know, slip and fall case or business dispute between people who are just fighting about money.

00:19:09.800 And there's what she says in public and then what she has to deal with in a court of law. 1.00

00:19:15.560 I'm not surprised that she's saying what she's saying.

00:19:18.220 I would be if I were her.

00:19:19.720 She's going to have to have the what I would call as the lawyer to come to Jesus talk with the client. 1.00

00:19:28.060 So, OK, let's see if she listens.

00:19:30.940 Yeah, yeah, we'll see.

00:19:33.180 I think there's a way out.

00:19:35.560 I mean, and this now the problem, part of the problem is from her side, if she's perceived as, you know, trying now trying to settle now, it looks like, oh, they won.

00:19:50.020 The other side won. So you got to work out all those delicacies of, you know, and nuances of timing and perception.

00:19:59.300 I think experienced Hollywood lawyers like these lawyers understand that they can figure out a way to resolve this case, present perhaps a joint press release of some sort, do some other creative things that where each side is sort of acknowledging that the other side in good faith, you know, acted in good faith and that we're just putting our weapons down now.

00:20:27.040 You know, the lawyers have done a great job on both sides, I think.

00:20:30.680 One thing that I'm not clear on, because I haven't been following it, I'm sure like you have,

00:20:37.220 but when I was representing you, they were going after a lot of people like you.

00:20:42.400 Are they still doing that?

00:20:43.940 Do they have people that are going to?

00:20:45.860 Yeah, so they still have Andy Signor from Popcorn Planet.

00:20:49.360 He's fighting his own subpoena in Florida.

00:20:52.940 He got a bigger subpoena than me.

00:20:54.680 He got his email account, text messages, like a broader one.

00:20:58.600 That's the only one left, as far as I know.

00:21:01.160 So Paris Hilton, as you know, they dropped that.

00:21:04.120 And the judge ruled on the subpoenas last week, saying that the content creators and journalists have the right to be anonymous.

00:21:12.500 And he said that since they withdrew most of the subpoenas, they weren't in bad faith.

00:21:20.200 So there was no malice or whatever.

00:21:22.980 I don't know the right word for it to say that, you know, they didn't file the subpoenas in fact, basically because they withdrew them, which makes no sense to me, because then they weren't really interested in what we had that they thought that we had if they just withdrew them.

00:21:38.640 But then the judge said that that means that they I don't know.

00:21:42.160 Yeah. So the reason I ask that question is because in the connection with the retaliation claim, it would seem to me that some evidence from people like you would be important because they're trying to prove that there was some manipulation going on.

00:22:01.200 and you've got these content creators such as yourself

00:22:05.200 or I don't know if you like to be called a content creator

00:22:08.740 or a journalist or, you know, that was an issue for Perez Hilton.

00:22:13.700 Yeah.

00:22:14.280 He was being portrayed as if he weren't a true journalist.

00:22:18.240 That was very offensive to him.

00:22:20.200 And, you know, I can understand that.

00:22:22.260 But it would seem to me that on their retaliation claim,

00:22:27.420 If they're going to suggest that some salacious narrative was being promoted to the public, that they got to find someone who was doing it.

00:22:43.020 And so I don't see that in what you're describing, unless who's Andy Sengdor, this last fellow that's it would seem to me that they would need someone like that.

00:22:55.240 I don't know what they're going to do with him.

00:22:58.440 I'll be interested to see how that turns out.

00:23:00.280 I think the reason why they go after him so hard is because he's working on a documentary about this case

00:23:06.080 and that he has interviewed people who are close to the set working on the set of It Ends With Us.

00:23:11.760 As he said, you know, he's a journalist.

00:23:13.480 He worked as a journalist contacting both sides here because he wanted information about the case,

00:23:19.020 which is how journalists work.

00:23:21.160 So the fact that they're saying that he was working with them,

00:23:24.440 He reached out to both sides and he got communication with Melissa Nathan, I think it was, that worked as the PR crisis management for Justin.

00:23:34.360 But he did ask to get quotes from her that he could present in his reporting.

00:23:41.020 So, I mean, it's just ridiculous.

00:23:43.360 So you think that they might bring in some of us to the stand? 0.73

00:23:47.960 I don't think they would need to.

00:23:50.160 I'm not in the case on a day-to-day basis to figure that out.

00:23:53.560 But from my perspective, it seems like that would be an essential part of the claim.

00:23:59.700 If I'm a juror, I would want to hear from somebody that says, yeah, I was influenced by this.

00:24:05.500 But even then, you know, that's one journalist's opinion or one journalist's approach.

00:24:13.800 If I'm a journalist, I'm not out to smear somebody.

00:24:16.240 I'm out to look at the facts objectively and say, this is what this looks like to me, right?

00:24:22.840 I am not doing it out of any malicious intent.

00:24:26.380 I just think that I'm entitled by the First Amendment to comment on, you know, what I think is right and what I think is wrong.

00:24:34.020 And even if it was from malicious intent, you're also allowed to do that, aren't you?

00:24:39.100 I mean, if someone's just like making content like, oh, I hate Blake Wiley. 1.00

00:24:43.420 She's such a bitch, whatever. 1.00

00:24:45.440 Right. 1.00

00:24:45.720 That's not illegal, is it?

00:24:47.520 No.

00:24:47.720 No.

00:24:48.120 No. So, I mean, you have the right, everyone has the right to have an opinion and to share it on the Internet.

00:24:55.580 Correct. And there's always, there's often a fine line between what's fact and what's opinion.

00:25:03.840 And, you know, the actual malice standard, of course, that you, I'm sure, know about very well from the New York Times versus Sullivan case,

00:25:11.260 which is a case that the Supreme Court is considering revisiting, by the way.

00:25:15.980 Oh, actual malice means essentially that you haven't done enough to ask or really to ascertain the truth of what you what you're saying.

00:25:25.680 And that, you know, it's not true what you're saying.

00:25:27.800 No, it's not true. Or you publish it with it with recklessly not doing what you should have done to ascertain whether it was true.

00:25:36.120 Like New York Times did with me, basically.

00:25:38.040 Right. So that's another actually that that reminds me that, you know, there's still his cross complaint, his counterclaim that it could be reinstated after an appeal.

00:25:53.060 So he has some leverage there. So, you know, it's not like she's completely, it's not like she can just take a shot. He still has some powder in his magazine there. So he can say, look, if you want to take a shot, then I'm going to keep, you know, I'll just keep going with my appeal and then I'll have my free shot at you once the second circuit reverses and I'll, you know, I'll take you to trial.

00:26:22.700 You don't want that. You don't want that.

00:26:25.480 I feel like now when thinking about how his case was dismissed, this is what is baffling to me.

00:26:31.260 His case was dismissed for the reason that he was he could not legally sue her because she sued him first for S.H. and retaliation.

00:26:42.960 So but now that she was not allowed to sue him for S.H., then doesn't that just fall apart, this old argument from the judge of why he dismissed Justin's case to begin with?

00:26:55.660 Well, I don't think that whether the claim was valid or not has anything to do with whether he could have counterclaimed.

00:27:07.380 The only question is on his counterclaim is whether he adequately alleged what he had to allege in order to state a viable claim.

00:27:18.400 And whether her claims themselves were valid or not has nothing to do with that.

00:27:25.200 I don't think so. But in any event, he still has that leverage. If there's an issue about

00:27:31.860 how do we resolve this and she's being difficult, if she is, say, look, you know, I still have this

00:27:37.540 thing out there. I, you know, do you really want me to go and spend another five years going after

00:27:43.520 you? And, you know, you have young kids, you have a career, you know. Career. And also another thing

00:27:53.700 that's still alive, which is also interesting, is the countersuit from Justin Baldoni and Jennifer

00:27:59.680 Abel against Stephanie Jones. The defamation claim against her is also alive. The judge dismissed a

00:28:08.020 few of her claims, but these are alive. So he and Jennifer Abel are still suing Stephanie Jones for

00:28:17.080 defamation. So there's a lot of information could come out in that case as well, because they have

00:28:23.600 even started discovery yet so okay there's a lot on the line there is a lot on the line

00:28:29.520 cases never quite end oh anyway well listen trusty this has been great i thank you again for having

00:28:37.020 me i really appreciate it uh you're like again you're doing a great job and you're gonna have

00:28:42.320 to find you know when this case goes away you'd have to find more to talk about maybe we'll talk

00:28:47.460 about the taylor swift case but you can't ask me because i'm a lawyer oh you oh on the um

00:28:52.100 The Ticketmaster case.

00:28:53.820 On the Ticketmaster case.

00:28:55.120 Yes, that's interesting.

00:28:56.940 So, yeah, so the SEDs wimped out on that case.

00:29:00.160 They settled.

00:29:01.960 The states are still going after Ticketmaster.

00:29:04.500 And so are my clients.

00:29:07.200 My clients are still suing Ticketmaster.

00:29:09.320 And we have a hearing coming up in a couple of weeks on a little portion of the amended complaint.

00:29:16.880 But the judge has already ruled that significant portions of the complaint can proceed.

00:29:21.380 so we're going to be starting discovery soon.

00:29:23.820 Great job.

00:29:24.440 Wow, that's super interesting.

00:29:25.660 I would love to cover that, actually, if, I mean.

00:29:30.280 Then you'll have to find other lawyers to ask questions about.

00:29:34.100 Can you explain quickly what that case is about

00:29:36.880 so people know if they haven't followed that?

00:29:38.780 Oh, so that case has to do with the whole fiasco

00:29:42.620 that happened when Taylor Swift started her Ares tour

00:29:46.040 There was supposed to be a presale for verified preferred fans, and it ended up being what I would charitably call a dumpster fire.

00:29:58.960 I would use more explicit language if I were talking behind closed doors.

00:30:05.360 But in any event, we allege that that resulted from basically systemic issues within Live Nation and Ticketmaster, whereby they've so dominated the marketplace that they can provide substandard service, get away with it and charge outrageous prices and screw the public.

00:30:33.180 And you're representing the public.

00:30:36.160 Yes, yes, yes.

00:30:38.160 Many of whom ended up paying tens of thousands of dollars to see her.

00:30:43.240 Wow.

00:30:43.920 Yes.

00:30:44.420 Wow.

00:30:44.940 We had one client who tried to get in like 17 different times and was basically charged every times.

00:30:52.460 Her credit card bill is like, you know, $40,000, $50,000 or something.

00:30:56.020 I think she's resolved that.

00:30:57.520 But anyway.

00:30:58.700 That's crazy.

00:31:00.120 Well, good luck with the case.

00:31:01.640 And I hope I'll get you back here on again soon.

00:31:04.420 I'm sure new things are happening every day from now on until the trial date on May 18th.

00:31:11.460 It's May 18th.

00:31:12.200 Is that the trial date in this case?

00:31:13.520 Yes.

00:31:14.660 Wow.

00:31:15.380 Yeah, it's close.

00:31:16.500 Five, six weeks now.

00:31:17.980 So we'll see.

00:31:19.140 Oh, wow.

00:31:20.260 Boy, there's a lot of work to do for these lawyers.

00:31:23.000 Oh, my gosh.

00:31:23.540 They're going to settle.

00:31:24.240 They're going to settle.

00:31:25.140 You think?

00:31:26.060 Okay.

00:31:26.640 They're going to settle it.

00:31:27.580 All right.

00:31:27.960 Thank you so much, John.

00:31:29.100 really appreciate the time you spent here with us to explain things. It's not that easy for me to

00:31:34.720 explain these things. Sometimes I'm like, what is going on? It doesn't make any sense to me, but

00:31:38.720 thank you for explaining things. You're very welcome, and I hope I've helped your listeners

00:31:44.620 understand a little bit more than they did before. I'm sure they do. Thank you. Thank you so much to

00:31:50.900 John Ganga, my favorite attorney, for explaining all of this to us. If you have any more questions,

00:31:56.780 please leave it in the comment section hopefully i'll have john on again soon i really appreciate

00:32:02.280 him taking the time out of his busy schedule to explain all of these things to us i'll leave a

00:32:06.800 link below to his company and how to contact him if you ever need an attorney i can definitely

00:32:11.460 recommend him he's so honest and trustworthy and i really really appreciate his opinions

00:32:16.740 anyways that's it for me guys thank you so much for watching and thanks for subscribing and if

00:32:22.120 you haven't done that yet please do hit the notification bell as well so you never miss

00:32:26.400 an episode of Flossom Talk and I'll see you soon. Bye!

Flaawsome Talk with Kjersti Flaa - April 05, 2026

Blake Lively has NO Chance !!

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript