More Than A Simple Favor: Judge Grants Blake Lively's Request To Have 'Improper' Taylor Swift Bullying Claims Tossed Out
Whether they like it or not, Blake Lively and Taylor Swift's friendship and any bad blood between them this week became the heart of Lively's ongoing legal battle with It Ends With Us co-star and director Justin Baldoni – but it didn't last long.
On Wednesday, lawyers for Lively condemned allegations in a letter by Baldoni's main attorney that the actress' team threatened the 'Shake It Off' superstar singer with a public drubbing if she didn't offer a full-throated public support for her old pal as 'scandalous' and 'completely false.'
More from Deadline
Taylor Swift Blackmailed? Blake Lively's Lawyer Decries 'Scandalous' Claims By Justin Baldoni's Team
A Full Timeline Of Blake Lively & Justin Baldoni's 'It Ends With Us' Feud In Court, Online & In The Media
Cruel Subpoena Summer: Taylor Swift Dragged Directly Into Pal Blake Lively's Battle With Justin Baldoni
On Thursday, just after Bryan Freedman reiterated his claim about the requested support and threats to 'release private text messages of a personal nature' if the recently subpoenaed Swift wasn't publicly behind Lively, the judge in the multimillion-dollar suit between the IEWU stars shut the whole sideshow down.
'The Letter is improper and must be stricken,' ordered Judge Lewis J. Liman in response to a motion by Lively's side filed mere hours after Freedman's letter. 'It is irrelevant to any issue before this Court and does not request any action from this Court.'
Liman (who, as we've mentioned before, is the brother of director Doug Liman) goes on to say of Freedman's letter in his order: It concerns a subpoena proceeding in the District of Columbia over which this Court has no authority. The sole purpose of the Letter is to 'promote public scandal' by advancing inflammatory accusations, on information and belief, against Lively and her counsel. It transparently invites a press uproar by suggesting that Lively and her counsel attempted to 'extort' a well-known celebrity. Retaining the Letter on the docket would be of no use to the Court and would allow the Court's docket to serve as a 'reservoir of libelous statements for press consumption.' The same is true for the Wayfarer Parties' subsequent submission, which the Court will strike sua sponte for the same reasons.'
That 'subsequent submission' Liman refers to is another letter from Freedman today that claims to name names – actually, one name specifically.
That name is attorney J. Douglas Baldridge.
A longtime lawyer for Swift, Baldridge is a partner out of Venables LLP's DC office. Since 2023, the George Washington University Law School graduate has also been the general counsel for Swift's 13 Management.
With Venables fighting the 'abuse of the discovery process' subpoena, as the firm termed it in its own filing, that could drag itself and Swift into the the Lively-Baldoni brawl, Freedman offered more details of a potentially explosive call from February. Emphasizing the Super Bowl on February 9 that Swift attended but Lively was absent from, the claimed conversation appears to have sought to stamp out speculation that Swift was distancing herself from Lively due to the latter's dust-up with Baldoni, his Wayfarer Studios, its execs and PR leaders Melissa Nathan and Jennifer Abel.
Citing his response to a voicemail from 'a person very closely linked to Taylor Swift,' Freedman said in a corresponding affidavit: 'During the February 14th phone call, which lasted approximately one hour, the speaker told me that they had been informed that J. Douglas Baldridge, counsel for Taylor Swift and a partner at Venable LLP, had received a phone call from Michael Gottlieb, counsel for Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds during which Mr. Gottlieb requested, on Ms. Lively' s behalf, that Taylor Swift make a social media statement in support of Ms. Lively given her absence from the Super Bowl that year, and stated that if Ms. Swift failed to do so, Ms. Lively would release 'ten years' of private texts with Ms. Swift. The individual also told me that they had been informed that Mr. Baldridge had accused Mr. Gottlieb of extortion and ended the call.'
Neither Baldridge nor reps for Swift responded to request for comment from Deadline on today's filings, letters and Liman's order. However, in response to the now struck filings Thursday by Baldoni's side to have a motion for sanctions rebuffed, and before Liman ruled on the matter, Gottlieb had a new and strongly worded statement for Deadline.
'Another day, another bogus filing designed for click bait,' the Willkie Farr & Gallagher lawyer said.
'We reiterate our unequivocal denial, which Mr. Freedman has now admitted rely completely upon a source, no matter who it is, that doesn't even claim to have witnessed the conversations that Freedman describes, making this triple-hearsay statement as unreliable as information reported from children in a game of telephone,' Gottlieb adds. 'These claims remain completely untethered from reality—to be clear: the conversations as described did not happen, and we will hold Mr. Freedman accountable for his misconduct.'
Well-known to be close to Lively and the godmother to one of her children, IEWU soundtrack contributor Swift has made several cameos in various lawsuits and countersuits ever since Lively on December 20 filed her sexual harassment and retaliation complaint with California's Civil Rights Department.
In addition to being brought on to the Sony-distributed film's soundtrack, Swift had a walk-on at Lively's NYC apartment at one point during production backing her friend's script rewrites to a cowered Baldoni. Along with the volumes of text message released by all sides, Swift is also mentioned as a 'dragon' for Lively in an exchange between Lively and Baldoni. Still, the subpoena issued earlier this month kicked it up a level or two for the scandal-adverse Swift coming off her record-breaking global Eras Tour that ended in December 2024.
Now, while the battle of the Swift subpoena continues in courtsl, it looks like all's good between Lively and 'Bad Blood' singer.
For Lively and Baldoni, with parties like the New York Times, Deadpool star Reynolds, various publicists and Lively herself seeking to be dismissed from the sprawling legal actions, the trial date of March 9, 2026 is still on the books.
Best of Deadline
Where To Watch All The 'Mission: Impossible' Movies: Streamers With Multiple Films In The Franchise
Everything We Know About 'My Life With The Walter Boys' Season 2 So Far
'Bridgerton' Season 4: Everything We Know So Far
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Steelers fans fume over Aaron Rodgers signing: ‘He sucks'
Four MVPs, 10 Pro Bowls and a Super Bowl ring be damned – some Steelers fans are furious over the arrival of Aaron Rodgers. Pittsburgh's signing of Rodgers has received a mixed bag of reviews in the Steel City, with many fans voicing their frustrations over the move. Concerns have ranged from the quarterback's age (41), to the short-term nature of his one-year, $13.6 million contract, to his anti-vaccination beliefs. 'No, not optimistic at all,' lifelong Steelers fan Ron Stadler, Jr. told USA TODAY's Jarrett Bell. 'I wish he'd have retired already. He sucks.' Getty Images The most viral example of the frustration came from one fan on social media, who filmed himself burning his autographed Minkah Fitzpatrick jersey while declaring he would 'never be a Steelers fan again.' 'Yinz decide to pick up Aaron Rodgers, I can't do this anymore,' said the fan, @greencheckdegen on TikTok. 'You keep killing us.' The fan went on to reference the Steelers trading star wideout George Pickens and losing Justin Fields in free agency as further reasons for his departure from the fanbase. Veteran defensive lineman Cam Heyward took to X to respond to the fan. 'First off, why Minkah's jersey? That's bonkers. Second, why burn when there are plenty of people that need clothes,' Heyward wrote. 'Third, you are going to regret it!!' Other reactions to the news were less extreme, but the sentiment remains: a large faction of Pittsburgh's fanbase is less than pleased with the signing. 'This feels cheap and desperate,' wrote one fan on X. 'This is not a Pittsburgh Steeler.' Another posted: 'I hope he fails the physical. I am not a fan of this decision.' Aaron Rodgers signed a one-year, $13.6 million contract with the Steelers. AP Many of the replies under the Steelers' announcement of Rodgers' signing carried a similar tone, mixed in with a smattering of more positive responses. Last season, Rodgers passed for 28 touchdowns and 3,897 yards with the Jets, who cut him after the season. Rodgers will have his first chance to prove the doubters wrong when the Steelers take on those same Jets — and Fields — in Week 1 at MetLife Stadium on Sept. 7.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Judge Dismisses Justin Baldoni's Lawsuit Against Blake Lively, Ryan Reynolds, The New York Times
Justin Baldoni's lawsuit against Blake Lively, Ryan Reynolds and The New York Times was dismissed by a judge on Monday, according to court documents obtained by HuffPost. The news marks the latest in the tumultuous back-and-forth legal battle that stems from the film 'It Ends With Us,' which Baldoni directed and starred in. Lively, who is married to Reynolds, starred in the film as well. Baldoni filed a $400 million countersuit against Lively, Reynolds and Lively's publicist, Leslie Sloane, in January, claiming that they attempted to extort and defame him with sexual harassment claims and that the two actors tried to take control of his film. He also claimed in a defamation suit that the Times had falsely reported that he had created a smear campaign against Lively. Baldoni's countersuit also lists the film producer Jamey Heath, Wayfarer partner Steve Sarowitz and publicists Melissa Nathan and Jennifer Abel as plaintiffs. However, Judge Lewis J. Liman of the U.S. District Court in Manhattan argued that Lively had relied on 'legally permissible hard bargaining or renegotiation of working conditions' rather than extortion. Liman also said that Lively's statements accusing Baldoni of sexual harassment are privileged because they were made in a California Civil Rights Department complaint and therefore not considered defamation. Additionally, Liman wrote that Baldoni's claim that Reynolds, Sloane and the Times defamed him does not hold up because the suit does not prove that any of the parties 'seriously doubted these statements were true based on the information available to them.' In a 132-page opinion, the judge explicitly wrote that the Wayfarer Parties, which refer to Baldoni, Wayfarer Studios and others in the company, 'have not adequately alleged that Lively's threats were wrongful extortion rather than legally permissible hard bargaining or renegotiation of working conditions. Additionally, the Wayfarer Parties have not shown that some of Lively's allegedly extortionate acts damaged them.' (Baldoni is a co-founder of Wayfarer Studios, an independent production studio involved in the film.) 'The Wayfarer Parties have not alleged that Lively is responsible for any statements other than the statements in her CRD complaint, which are privileged,' the opinion also stated. 'The Wayfarer Parties have alleged that Reynolds and Sloane made additional statements accusing Baldoni of sexual misconduct and that the Times made additional statements accusing the Wayfarer Parties of engaging in a smear campaign. But the Wayfarer Parties have not alleged that Reynolds, Sloane or the Times would have seriously doubted these statements were true based on the information available to them, as is required for them to be liable for defamation under applicable law.' 'The Times had no obvious motive to favor Lively's version of events,' Liman added.'The Wayfarer Parties' additional claims also fail. Accordingly, the Amended Complaint must be dismissed in its entirety.' While the judge dismissed the lawsuit, Baldoni is allowed to file an amended complaint by June 23. However, he may only include claims relevant to breach of implied covenant and tortious interference with a contract, which were also included in his complaint. Lively's lawyers Esra Hudson and Mike Gottlieb told HuffPost that the ruling is 'a total victory and a complete vindication.' 'As we have said from day one, this '$400 million' lawsuit was a sham, and the Court saw right through it,' the statement continued. The attorneys said they will be seeking attorneys' fees, and treble and punitive damages from Baldoni and other Wayfarer Studios parties. Sigrid McCawley, Sloane's attorney, told HuffPost in a statement on Monday that she was 'wrongfully dragged' into this lawsuit in an attempt to damage her reputation. 'Today's decision by the Court makes clear that Sloane did nothing wrong. Sloane stands fully vindicated, and justice has been served,' McCawley said. The New York Times celebrated the lawsuit's dismissal in a statement to HuffPost. 'We are grateful to the court for seeing the lawsuit for what it was: a meritless attempt to stifle honest reporting,' a spokesperson for the Times said. 'Our journalists went out and covered carefully and fairly a story of public importance, and the court recognized that the law is designed to protect just that sort of journalism. We will continue to stand up in court for our journalism and for our journalists when their work comes under attack.' Lively's lawsuit was filed in New York in December. 'For years prior to the release of the Film, Mr. Baldoni portrayed himself asa leader of the male feminist movement, writing books, hosting podcasts, and holding TED Talks on the topic. In reality, however, Mr. Baldoni's public persona is a stark contrast to his private behavior, which is replete with hypocrisy, misogyny, and retaliation,' Lively's attorneys wrote in her complaint. Baldoni's countersuit argued that Lively and Reynolds used their prestige 'to steal an entire film right out of the hands of its director and production studio.' It added that Baldoni and Wayfarer only took legal action because Lively had 'unequivocally left them with no choice, not only to set the record straight…But also to put the spotlight on the parts of Hollywood that they have dedicated their careers to being the antithesis of.' The trial is expected to start in March 2026. Representatives for Reynolds, Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios did not immediately reply to HuffPost's request for comment. Blake Lively's Lawyer Accused Of Threatening To Leak Taylor Swift Texts Blake Lively Accuses Justin Baldoni Of Making Women On 'It Ends With Us' Set Uncomfortable Justin Baldoni Reportedly Admits He 'F***ed Up' In Voice Note Apology To Blake Lively
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Lili Reinhart's queer indie series, 'Hal & Harper,' is hitting MUBI this fall
Sapphics, are you paying attention? You are going to want to know this: A new independent streaming series starring Lili Reinhart and Cooper Raiff is headed our way! On Monday, Deadline broke the news that streaming service MUBI acquired the rights to Hal & Harper, an eight-episode show centered around the titular codependent siblings, played by Reinhart and Raiff. Raiff also created, wrote, and directed the show. The series premiered at the Sundance Film Festival earlier this year, earning rave reviews from viewers who appreciated both the heart and the comedy at the core of the show. Notably, both Reinhart and Raiff also play the much younger versions of themselves in childhood flashbacks, adding a Pen15-like quality to those sequences. If that wasn't enough to have us looking forward to Hal & Harper, it's also got a stacked cast that includes some queer faves. Mark Ruffalo plays their father, Betty Gilpin plays his girlfriend, and Bottoms' Havana Rose Liu plays the girl Hal is interested in. Oh, and did we mention Harper has a girlfriend? The Sex Lives of College Girls star Alyah Chanelle Scott tackles that role, while Addison Timlin plays the coworker Harper is crushing on. MUBI has had a hand in distributing several well-received queer films in recent years, including Shiva Baby, Knife + Heart, and Benedetta. Hal & Harper is one of a few series they have coming up, with the acquisition being praised by those hoping independent TV is a viable way forward. "MUBI is the perfect home for our very specific family show. They're a singular platform that understands the art they're putting out," Raiff told Deadline. "I am in awe of what they've done recently, and am excited to be a part of the family." And if you're still on the fence about the whole thing, we'll just leave this here: — (@) Hal & Harper will premiere on MUBI sometime this fall.
