Ask 2 Lawyers

We’re back with a major update in the ongoing legal saga: Justin Baldoni has filed a motion to compel regarding the Vanzan lawsuit—a central and controversial part of the larger fight with Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds.

What’s this motion about? Why is Baldoni pushing to enforce discovery here? And how does this play into the broader case strategy?

We also take a moment to catch up on the current state of the lawsuit after a whirl...

The dust is settling… so what comes next?

We’re joined again by employment attorney Ron Zambrano to take stock of the aftermath of Judge Liman’s sweeping order, which dismissed most of Justin Baldoni’s $400 million countersuit.

What does this mean for Baldoni’s case moving forward? What’s the strategy now on both sides and how might the legal teams regroup after this big development?

Read the Order on Emotional Damages here: https:...

A legal fight is brewing over the $275 million estate of music legend Jimmy Buffett. His widow is suing to remove the co-trustee—an accountant—raising questions about trust administration, fiduciary duty, and what happens when massive estates are in dispute.

As trust and estate litigators, this is right in our wheelhouse. We’ll break down:

- Why a widow might sue a co-trustee - What it means when an estate is worth hundreds of mill...

We’re joined by two incredible guests—Lauren from Court of Random Opinion and Omar aka The Titled Lawyer—as we break down Judge Liman’s sweeping order that dismissed much of Justin Baldoni’s $400 million countersuit.

We’re breaking down what led to this sweeping order, what’s left of Baldoni’s case (including the sexual harassment allegations), and where he could go from here legally.

We're trust and estate litigators diving deep i...

We’re back on the Lively v. Baldoni lawsuit—but this time, we’re playing a bit of devil’s advocate.

No matter how wild the facts may look from the outside, Blake Lively still deserves fair process under the law. In this live, we explain what California’s Civil Code Section 47.1 was meant to do, why it's such a big deal in this case, and how it intersects with fundamental due process rights—even for controversial parties.

We're not ...

Emotional damages might be off the table in the Lively v. Baldoni case — so what now?

We’re back to talk about what losing emotional damages really means for this lawsuit, and whether Blake Lively’s claims still hold weight. The Jury Pool (that’s YOU) had some incredibly sharp insights in the comments, and we’re giving credit where credit’s due.

We’ll also reference California’s jury instructions (CACI) to break down how these dama...

Another update in Lively v. Baldoni—and this one’s all about strategy and signal.

Blake Lively is now withdrawing claims, and we’re here to break down what that actually means. Is it a win, a retreat, or simply nothing at all?

Plus, Judge Liman denied Baldoni’s team’s motion. Is the court signaling that no evidence will be considered? That the parties need to resolve this on their own?

We're real lawyers reacting in real-time, givi...

We’re digging into a new issue in the Blake Lively v. Justin Baldoni defamation case: Esra Hudson—Lively’s attorney—is a board member of the California Women’s Law Center, one of the groups that just filed an amicus brief supporting her.

Is this a conflict of interest? Should it have been disclosed? Does it impact the integrity or optics of the amicus support?

We break it all down as real lawyers, explaining what this could mean le...

Sometimes the law—and live shows—don’t go exactly as planned. We’re down one lawyer today, but Keith is holding it down solo to keep you in the loop and make sure the jury pool isn’t left hanging.

In this episode, we break down Bryan Freedman’s newest response to the amicus briefs backing Blake Lively and her motion to dismiss Justin Baldoni’s lawsuit. Will the briefs stay in or get tossed? Keith gives his take on what might happen...

Another twist in the Blake Lively v. Justin Baldoni defamation lawsuit—and this one’s big. Advocacy groups are now backing Lively by filing amicus briefs in support of her motion to dismiss, citing California’s new Civil Code Section 47.1 (the so-called "Me Too Law").   In this episode, we’re breaking down:   - What an amicus brief actually is - Why advocacy groups are getting involved now - What this support could mean for both si...

We’re back on the Blake Lively v. Justin Baldoni defamation lawsuit—and this time, we’re diving deep into the lawyers behind the headlines.

We’re talking about Bryan Freedman (for Baldoni), Esra Hudson (for Lively), and Samantha Katze (from Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP), who issued the subpoena to Stephanie Jones. Is this just tough advocacy—or has someone crossed a legal or ethical line?

Join the jury pool as we dig into the ...

We’re back with a breakdown on the Jay-Z legal saga. The hip-hop legend has just filed an amended complaint—and now he’s going after Jane Doe and her attorney, Tony Buzbee, amongst a handful of other attorneys.

What’s in this new filing? Why is Buzbee being named? And what does this all mean for the underlying claims?

We’re breaking down the legal strategy, the possible implications, and where this case could be heading next. It’s ...

Back by request from the jury pool—we’re diving into the case of Kilmar Garcia, a migrant father and longtime U.S. resident who was deported to El Salvador under controversial circumstances.

We’re raising the big question: Is due process a right for all people—or only those already seen as “worthy” by society?

Join Ask 2 Lawyers as we look at the legal issues, the constitutional implications, and what this says about the state of j...

A new $50 million sexual assault lawsuit has been filed against former NFL superstar and media personality, Shannon Sharpe, and it’s making headlines.

We’re breaking down the complaint, the lawyers behind the case, where it was filed, and why the jurisdiction could play a key role.

Plus, we’ll compare this lawsuit to the ongoing Blake Lively vs. Justin Baldoni case — what’s similar, what’s not, and what all of it says about high-pr...

The journalist behind the bombshell Daily Mail article joins us for an exclusive sit-down!

Josh Boswell, Senior Reporter for the Daily Mail, is here to talk about the latest headline-making twist in Blake Lively’s defamation lawsuit against Justin Baldoni—and the subpoena that some are calling “shady” or even a “sham.” You can read this article from Josh here: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-14618807/blake-lively-shad...

We’ve been sitting on this info with our best poker faces… but the time has come.

Today’s episode dives into the Daily Mail bombshell by Josh Boswell featuring quotes from us and new revelations in the Blake Lively v. Justin Baldoni defamation lawsuit. We’re breaking down the subpoena that’s now being called a smokescreen—and what it means for the case.

Was it a sham? Why are journalists getting dragged in? And what does this move ...

We’re bringing the bench to the podcast! In this special episode of A2L’s Sidebar, we’re joined by the brilliant Judge Liz—former judge, legal content creator, and powerhouse of courtroom experience.

We’ll be talking about her unique path to the bench, what it’s really like presiding over trials, and how she brings the law to life online for her growing YouTube audience.

Plus, we’ll dive into all the latest headline-making cases—li...

Is Blake Lively’s $400 million lawsuit unraveling? A new report just dropped a bombshell, raising serious questions about whether the subpoena at the heart of this case was even valid. Is this about justice—or a strategic smokescreen?

- Did Baldoni just catch a legal break? - What does the new article reveal about the subpoena’s shaky foundation? - And how does this all affect Ryan Reynolds, the PR teams, and the broader Me Too imp...

Get ready Jury Pool, A2L is back after a tough week of practicing law. Once again, Lively is making Section 47.1 the center point of her argument to dismiss the defamation lawsuit against her.

Baldoni argues that the Me Too 47.1 law shouldn’t apply—and goes even further, calling it unconstitutional. Lively argues that 47.1 was designed to protect victims like her. Who will be right? Stewart and Keith will give you their insight int...