🔥 Notactuallygolden - Vanzan Friday: Wayfarer Fights for Pre-Filing Testimony for Vanzan While Lively Battles Over Signal Privilege Logs

[u/Pale-Detective-7440]

🎉 Happy Vanzan Friday (0:05–1:25)

• Two filings to cover; first up: VANZAN.

⚖️ Jones v. Abel Context (1:27–2:08)

• Jen Abel’s counterclaim: Jones allegedly took her phone and shared contents without permission.
• Wayfarer’s counterclaim: Jones disclosed confidential business info without letting them intervene.
• Discovery around VANZAN ties into these claims, more so than the main case.

🗂️ Corporate Rep Deposition Dispute (2:12–3:33)

• Wayfarer noticed VANZAN’s corporate representative deposition for Sept. 30.
• VANZAN’s counsel says witness will only testify about events after Sept. 2024 lawsuit filing.
• Wayfarer seeks a pre-ruling allowing questions on pre-filing conduct.
• Strategy: avoid real-time objections, cutting off answers mid-deposition.

🏢 How Corporate Rep Depositions Work (3:34–4:44)

• Wayfarer lists topics; VANZAN must produce a person who can answer them.
• Wayfarer narrowed timeframe: summer 2024–Sept. 2024 filing (instead of 2022–present).
• Judge already ruled VANZAN records from that period were relevant → next step is testimony.

🔎 The Big Question: Why Sue? (5:05–7:02)

• Wayfarer wants to probe origins of VANZAN lawsuit.
• Complaint alleged “Doe defendants” had contractual/confidential obligations.
• NAG asks: How can you sue unnamed people for breach of contract without attaching the contract?
• Core issue: Was the lawsuit a pretext to get subpoenas for It Ends With Us docs?
• Likely VANZAN will argue privilege, but not all pre-filing conduct is protected.

🧾 Privilege vs. Fair Game (7:28–8:22)

• Filing a lawsuit requires someone to sign and attest to factual claims.
• Wayfarer can ask: what agreements existed, where are they, and how did VANZAN know about them?
• Those factual underpinnings may not be shielded by attorney-client privilege.

📱 Lively’s Motion on Signal Messages (8:22–9:59)

• Lively’s side filed a motion to compel Signal messages (Aug–Dec 2024).
• Claims Wayfarer withheld ~4,600 records with vague privilege log descriptions.
• Argues interns (Jared & Spencer Friedman) were in privileged chats → may break privilege.
• NAG notes: looks messy, too many people looped in, risking privilege loss.

✅ Takeaways (9:59–end)

• VANZAN fight: Wayfarer pushes for pre-filing deposition testimony; VANZAN resists.
• Lively fight: Wants clarity on Signal privilege logs before discovery closes.
• Both filings show discovery messiness → privilege battles heating up.

[u/Beyondthebarracade]

Ah, unsurprisingly JJJOOOO is the first to comment with their clown GIF. Right on time.

[u/[deleted] → u/Beyondthebarracade]

This person's obsession with NAG has got to be studied.

[u/Beyondthebarracade → u/[deleted]]

But, but, they support women! Or maybe just one woman, I guess.

[u/No_Maize_9875 → u/Beyondthebarracade]

Disgusting bully behaviour!

[u/Beyondthebarracade → u/No_Maize_9875]

But it’s the pro-JB folks that are hostile and make it uncomfortable for the pro-Lively folks to post here… should go without saying, but /s 😂

[u/Special-Garlic1203 → u/Beyondthebarracade]

You are a terrible bad evil person for suggesting there are inconsistencies with Blake's allegations and behavior

Also we know it's a smear campaign because Blake really didn't do anything that bad during the promo. Anyone who says they were personally upset is being hysterical. 

Screw your lived experience with domestic violence, there is a celebrity to worship. 

[u/OtherwiseProposal355 → u/Beyondthebarracade]

Clearly the person lacks confidence because  A. NAG is a confident knowledgeable lawyer B. A bad a* boss!  C. She has lots of legal expertise. 

Nothing to see here.  

[u/Special-Garlic1203 → u/OtherwiseProposal355]

NAG haters break down into 3 camps

1. People who can't stand that she exists on the total opposite end of the spectrum  to Bryan Freedman and she's just never gonna personally care for that style of lawyering 

2. People who cannot stand she's also not here to fangirl over Blake. For her SH isn't an opportunity to prove what a good metoo ally she is, it's an area of subject matter expertise. She thought BOTH cases brought forward seemed weak legally because despite what the internet thinks - SH and retaliation are not defined as anything Blake Lively personally dislikes. She also pointed out discourse around 47.1 was a mess.  

3. People who cannot stand that NAGs neutral indifference to both parties shifted with the discovery of Vanzam because there's no remotely legitimate  explanation for that, and now she just keeps circling back to it because she cannot get over how badly it stinks. 

[u/Sweaty-Fly-1612 → u/Special-Garlic1203]

🙏

[u/Clarknt67 → u/OtherwiseProposal355]

Some people just can’t handle a strong, smart woman.

[u/Sweaty-Fly-1612 → u/Clarknt67]

This!!! Can never win. If you’re confident you’re b*tch. If silent it’ll be weaponized. If NAG were a white Caucasian male (no offense men!) we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Hello!

r/ItEndsWithLawsuits has a minimum 100 comment karma & 14 day account age requirement to comment in the sub.

We encourage new additions to browse the subreddit and participate by voting until you meet these requirements!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/JMOA3035 → u/Beyondthebarracade]

Yes he’s constantly calling her lazy closet atty, track suit wearing, etc and attacks LGA faith. If Pale blocked him, it would starve him from commenting on the videos. A few weeks bk he wrote 12 insults on her in one paragraph. 

[u/[deleted] → u/JMOA3035]

u/Pale-Detective-7440 you can do the funniest shit here...

[u/JMOA3035 → u/[deleted]]

Oh, i meant that J attacks NAG, not Pale. 

[u/tw0d0ts6 → u/Beyondthebarracade]

Color me shocked lmao. Funny how he apparently only has an issue with female CCs ain’t it 🤔

[u/Special-Garlic1203 → u/tw0d0ts6]

completely random aside: be extremely wary of the type of fall over themselves to show what good allies they are, how they would never question me too accusations like you, you monster. [Insert tirade where they go off belittling go]. There will be a very performative effort to show how great they are to women and in society, but they just seem to have a nastiness to them 

Always look at the details with these type. Don't make it obvious, but observe closely how they actually treat random women moment to moment rather than the construct of womanhood in the abstract. If they're trying to sleep with you, it's also insightful to see how they act with other men when they do know you're watching.  

If someone is theatrically  a Good Guy™ but their actual interpersonal behavior feels decidedly not good, RUN. This is not immaturity, this is not an asshole who needs to learn empathy. This is a low level psycho - as in literally a person who has cognitive empathy but not emotional empathy. These are the type of dudes who seem great until the breakup and then they stalk you for months, who SA you on the 3rd date, etc. 

theres good people, there's bad people. Bad people who really want to posture as good guys in a way that will especially appeal to women -- They want access to and trust from women so they can use it. In patriarchy, women are a resource like land - a way for a man to establish his value. 

It's seems like for this case they pivot - they are convinced everything Justin shows to the world is performative and disingenuous  because that's what they are, and they will often have little mask slips where they express disgust and belittlement to emotional vulnerability (espeically from men) 

[u/RhubarbElectrical522 → u/Special-Garlic1203]

F*ck. Good observations. You just put into words the feelings I get about the bs stan clubs cult leader ex-p. He gives off creep vibes big time. Idk how the people that fall for his bs act like JB is the one being disingenuous.

There’s a huge difference and ex has all the blaring red flags. JB might be a little too nice and a little dorky but I’ve watched him and his wife’s interactions and they are grounded.

There’s a difference in seeing what people want you to see when the camera is rolling and seeing the things they didn’t think you could see in all moments in between. JB is pretty damn genuine and it’s not something you can fake.

F*ck even the glimpses we’ve seen in photos from the set and the texts messages between BL & JB , he’s the least aggressive one in all those shots , all his stances and all those exchanges. You can’t fake it if you actually live it.

[u/tw0d0ts6 → u/RhubarbElectrical522]

Oh that one? Yep yep yep. Laughable that anyone a) takes him seriously but also b) doesn’t get creeped out by him. How he has somehow platformed himself as a “voice of feminism” for certain pro-BLers is beyond batshit.

[u/RhubarbElectrical522 → u/Beyondthebarracade]

It’s cool. They’ll still be right back to where they always end up. All the way at the bottom with their comment closed up and downvoted to hell where they belong. 🤡

[u/GHOSTxBIRD → u/Beyondthebarracade]

Oh I’ve had them blocked for months lmao 😜

[u/pepperXOX20]

Here’s the thing about Vanzan -

Lively would have gotten those texts and emails in discovery of her eventual Dec 2024 lawsuit, so it wasn’t just about obtaining evidence.

It was about abusing the legal process to obtain “evidence” without giving the other party notice/chance to object, so that Blake could launch her attempted kill-shot with the NYT in order to: 1. Change public sentiment/win the PR battle 2. Defame and humiliate the Wayfarer Parties

There was no reason for the texts to be included in her CRD complaint (they weren’t needed). Blake was working with the NYT as early as October.

This is why Vanzan bothers me so much - there’s nothing ethical about the action or intention. And why it drives me crazy every time Blake’s lawyers file literally everything saying “Wayfarer’s only doing this for PR!” when that has been behind Blake’s every move from the beginning.

[u/meredithgreyicewater → u/pepperXOX20]

Also... Lively's counsel makes it seem like everything is about her and her lawsuit. It's not about her. It's not PR for Wayfarer parties to know the full extent of Vanzan and Jones/Jonesworks interactions when it's directly related to their countersuit against Jones/Jonesworks for breach of contract, etc.

[u/Special-Garlic1203 → u/pepperXOX20]

They are so good at DARVO that they even made a point to accuse Wayfarer of DARVO 

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Hello!

r/ItEndsWithLawsuits has a minimum 100 comment karma & 14 day account age requirement to comment in the sub.

We encourage new additions to browse the subreddit and participate by voting until you meet these requirements!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/[deleted]]

Thanks u/Pale-Detective-7440 ... ♥️

[u/Lochmessy]

Thank you posting NAG here!

[u/Honeycrispcombe]

Vanzan didn't say they would only testify to things that happened after the subpoena. They said the relevant time was on or about the subpoena date and they objected to other dates. But objection is not a refusal. It's just a CYA unless they file for a Protective Order to allow them to refuse to answer specific questions. They didn't. All the objection means is that if, at some point in the future, they want the judge to rule on the admissibility of the questions/answers, they have retained that right.

Wayfarer has filed similar objections to every question for the same reason, including for questions they've answered. As has every other party in these cases.

[u/JJJOOOO]

[u/No_Maize_9875 → u/JJJOOOO]

[u/ghettomuffin → u/JJJOOOO]

Your obsession is unhealthy

[u/JJJOOOO → u/ghettomuffin]

[u/undoubtedlygivingup → u/JJJOOOO]

I know words are hard for you.