[ad_1]
It doesn’t appear very similar to the languid canine days of summer time for Justin Baldoni in relation to the It Ends With Us director’s sprawling authorized fracas with Blake Lively over her claims of sexual harassment on the Sony launched flick and the alleged on-line smear marketing campaign that adopted final yr.
With the brouhaha of earlier this month over Lively’s (now very a lot sealed) deposition being partially leaked and positioned on the courtroom docket lastly dying down and Baldoni’s Wayfarer Studios battle with numerous insurance coverage firms over funds to pay authorized charges nonetheless very a lot heating up, the previous Jane the Virgin actor this week has come out swinging for his predominant lawyer and towards accusations of harassment of a special type from one other IEWU actress.
“Ms. Lively’s post-litigation conduct has executed nothing to endear her to the general public, the press or ‘content creators,’” Wayfarer attorney Kevin Fritz proclaims in an August 18 opposition filing to Lively’s movement for sanctions towards sharp and generally silver tongued Baldoni prime lawyer Bryan Freedman. “A recent barrage of subpoenas has angered and alienated those already critical of Ms. Lively, forcing a number of them to seek this Court’s intervention.”
Then, with a powerful variety of Deadline posts on the authorized saga that began when Lively filed a grievance over Baldoni’s alleged misconduct with the California Civil Rights Department, the Meister Seelig & Fein accomplice goes to city, with some assist from Liner Freedman Taitelman + Cooley’s Ellyn S. Garofalo. Just a few weeks again, Lively’s authorized group requested Judge Lewis Liman as soon as once more to step in and impose sanctions on Freedman as a consequence of what they name the West LA litigator’s ongoing “publicly slandering” of their excessive profile shopper as this excessive profile case heads to trial in federal courtroom in March 2026 (except all of them put their swords down and settle — unlikely).
Blake Lively & Justin Baldoni in the course of the filming of It Ends With Us (Credit: Sony)
Nicole Rivelli / Jojo Whilden / Sony Pictures Releasing / courtesy Everett Collection
“Blissfully tone deaf to her own conduct, Ms. Lively is not only unwilling to accept that her own celebrity and actions have generated the media frenzy she now complains of and the weight of negative publicity against her,” Fritz states in a request to see the huge ranging sanctions and the movement for them tossed out. “She conveniently ignores that she and her counsel have been less than shy about publicly bashing Mr. Freedman and the Wayfarer Defendants in the press. Nevertheless, Ms. Lively seeks monetary sanctions, attorneys’ fees, a reprimand and revocation of Mr. Freedman’s pro hac vice admission for statements primarily relating to whether Ms. Lively would appear at deposition and the falsity of her claims.”
Having seen his personal $400 million countersuit towards Lively, Ryan Reynolds, their publicist and the New York Times kicked to the curb in June, Baldoni and his Wayfarer crew at the moment are awaiting Judge Liman’s choice on Freedman’s destiny.
Today, Lively noticed some motion on her problem over Team Baldoni apparently not giving her group post-December 2024 paperwork sought in discovery and Team Baldoni acquired an additional 48 hours of kinds.
“The Wayfarer Parties respond that only certain production requests relate to the alleged ongoing smear campaign, which Lively has cited as the basis for seeking discovery postdating December 2024, Judge Liman wrote in a short-ish order Tuesdsy. “In her reply memorandum of law, Lively provides a specific list of requests for which she seeks documents through the present. The Wayfarer Parties have not had an opportunity to respond to that filing. They are therefore permitted until August 21, 2025, to file a two-page letter brief addressing the extent to which discovery “through the present” is or just isn’t applicable for the particular requests.”
What the Wayfarer Parties have had a change to reply to and definitely have responded to is It Ends With Us actress Isabela Ferrer’s accusations that Baldoni and group have been making an attempt to “harass” her and “engaged in bad faith tactics” over a subpoena associated, no shock, to the Lively case.
Lawyers for Ferrer, who performed the youthful model of pal Lively’s Lily Bloom character in IEWU, stated in an August 17 submitting that they objected to Baldoni’s group’s want to be permitted to “serve her by alternative means,” after a number of unsuccessful and self-described “diligent” makes an attempt. In reality, attorneys for Ferrer, who assumed her authorized prices can be lined by the manufacturing underneath her contract, don’t just like the subpoena in any respect. “Baldoni made no effort to tailor the subpoena towards the production of new or different materials, demonstrating that the real aim of the Baldoni Subpoena, as well as the pending Motion, is to harass Ms. Ferrer.”
Monday, Baldoni’s group took only a day to swing again with a letter of their very own – with Lively as exhibit 1:
It was not the Wayfarer Parties who first subpoenaed Ms. Ferrer – it was Ms. Lively, and (once more) Mr. Michelman seems to have accepted service of her Subpoena with out objection. Ms. Lively shouldn’t be permitted to acquire discovery from Ms. Ferrer, whereas Ms. Ferrer and her counsel frustrate all effort by the Wayfarer Parties to acquire the invention vital to the preparation of their protection. Given the circumstances, the Wayfarer Parties are prepared to stipulate that not one of the events will use any communication to, from or regarding Ms. Ferrer, or any testimony from her, in any method on this motion. That stipulation will fulfill Ms. Ferrer’s obvious want to keep away from involvement within the litigation and trial.
What the result of that dispute is stays as of tonight TBD – like a lot of this case.