Latest news with #WillkieFarr
Hindustan Times
24-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Hindustan Times
Taylor Swift insider who exposed alleged Blake Lively ‘threat' unmasked
Taylor Swift was recently caught up in a legal dispute between her former friend, Blake Lively, and Justin Baldoni, but a surprising twist has shifted the spotlight. Though initially subpoenaed to testify, Swift was spared a court appearance after Baldoni's legal team withdrew the request, reportedly because they had already received key evidence. An insider revealed to Daily Mail that the evidence came from a shocking source: Swift's own father, Scott Swift, who allegedly leaked private exchanges between his daughter and Lively. Also Read: Chris Brown belts out tunes in jail and leaves heartfelt note for an inmate: 'Thank you my brother…' The source revealed to the outlet, 'Scott Swift did not want his daughter to be dragged into this any further and he voluntarily gave up this information as part of a deal that would include [Baldoni's team] withdrawing their subpoena for Taylor.' Baldoni's attorney, Bryan Freedman, revealed in a recent court filing that Lively's lawyer, Michael Gottlieb of Willkie Farr, allegedly approached Swift's legal team at Venable with a demand tied to the case. The documents claimed that Gottlieb 'demanded that Ms. Swift release a statement of support for Ms. Lively, intimating that, if Ms. Swift refused to do so, private text messages of a personal nature in Ms. Lively's possession would be released.' The documents also claimed that the It Ends With Us star requested that Swift delete the messages. In a sworn affidavit, Freedman stated he spent an hour on the phone with someone 'very closely linked' to the Blank Space singer, who shared the details about the alleged pressure from Lively's team. At the time, the identity of the source—later revealed to be Swift's father, Scott—was not disclosed. Meanwhile, Gottlieb revealed to Page Six, 'We unequivocally deny all of these so-called allegations, which are cowardly sourced to supposed anonymous sources, and completely untethered from reality.' An insider supported Freedman's claims on Friday, telling the Daily Mail it appeared Lively's legal team 'tried to extort Taylor by threatening to release private information about her so that she would support a narrative that she was not a part of.' Also Read: Kanye West ignites concern with recent strange post; 'Forgive me for the pain…' The alleged Scott's efforts to safeguard his daughter in the ongoing Lively and Baldoni legal battle come after Travis Kelce pledged his allegiance to Swift by unfollowing the Gossip Girl alum's husband, Ryan Reynolds, on Instagram. Despite the drama surrounding the alleged threats, the judge in the case between Lively and Baldoni ruled the claims inadmissible, labeling them 'improper' and 'irrelevant' to the legal proceedings.
India Today
15-05-2025
- Entertainment
- India Today
Blake Lively 'threatened' Taylor Swift with private texts, claims Justin Baldoni
Blake Lively has reportedly threatened her best friend, pop superstar Taylor Swift, with the release of private text messages unless Swift publicly supports her claims against co-star Justin Baldoni, according to a new court filing. Swift's legal team is now working to keep her distance from the escalating legal documents obtained by Page Six reveal that Lively's attorney, Michael Gottlieb of Willkie Farr, allegedly contacted Swift's legal representatives with a demand. The filing claims that Gottlieb urged Swift to issue a public statement in support of Lively, implying that failure to do so would result in the release of personal and private text messages in Lively's Gottlieb has strongly denied these allegations. In a statement on behalf of Lively's team, he said: "We unequivocally deny all of these so-called allegations, which are cowardly sourced to supposed anonymous individuals and are completely untethered from reality. Justin Baldoni's team is attempting to cause damage without any supporting evidence." Baldoni's production company, Wayfarer Studios, maintains that they received the information from a highly credible source. The actor also alleged that Lively had asked Swift to delete their message history. According to Baldoni's legal team, Swift's attorney responded in writing, calling the alleged threat "inappropriate" and "extortionate," and requested that Lively's team cease all such lawyers are now pushing for access to the private exchanges, claiming that Swift is a key witness in the case. While the specific contents of the messages remain unclear, the documents note that Lively allegedly compared Swift and her husband to Game of Thrones characters while suggesting creative changes to a rooftop scene in 'It Ends With Us'.advertisementSwift's team has previously denied any involvement in the film or the ongoing dispute, aside from granting permission for her song My Tears Ricochet to be used in the controversy stems from a lawsuit filed in December 2024, in which Blake Lively accused Justin Baldoni of sexual harassment, along with additional abuse claims and allegations of a targeted smear Watch
Indian Express
14-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Indian Express
Blake Lively ‘threatening' Taylor Swift with ‘private texts' if singer doesn't support her, claims Justin Baldoni in new court filing
All is not well between besties Taylor Swift and Blake Lively, according to Justin Baldoni, whose legal team in a new court filing accused the Gossip Girl star of threatening the singer with their private texts if she doesn't extend public support to her in the ongoing It Ends With Us legal drama. Earlier, the Cruel Summer singer was subpoenaed in the case, following which reports emerged that Swift's team is fighting the decision, maintaining that the pop star has no connection to the ongoing case. Lively's lawyer, on the other hand, has slammed the new filing as 'categorically false.' Here's what happened. According to the court document obtained by Page Six, Blake's attorney, Michael Gottlieb of Willkie Farr, reached out to Taylor Swift's law firm, Venable, and demanded 'that Ms. Swift release a statement of support for Ms. Lively, intimating that if Ms. Swift refused to do so, private text messages of a personal nature in Ms. Lively's possession would be released.' However, Gottlieb has called out these filings and responded on behalf of Blake and her team, saying, Justin's team is just trying to cause trouble and hurt people without evidence. 'We unequivocally deny all of these so-called allegations, which are cowardly sourced to supposed anonymous sources, and completely untethered from reality.' The back-and-forth comes days after both Blake and her husband Reynolds, called out Justin Baldoni over Swift's subpoena, even comparing the move to the Barnum & Bailey Circus. Also read: Taylor Swift's rep rips into Justin Baldoni over subpoena, calls it a 'clickbait' move: 'She was on tour, not on set' Baldoni and his Wayfarer Studios claimed they received the information from a 'highly reliable' anonymous source. Baldoni also says Blake asked Taylor to delete their text messages. According to Justin's lawyers, Taylor's lawyer sent a written reply telling Blake's lawyer to stop these threats, calling them 'inappropriate' and 'extortionate.' They want to get hold of these communications to prove there was an attempt to intimidate Taylor, who is considered a key witness. While it was not mentioned what messages they wanted to erase, Baldoni's team has pointed to the 'dragon reference' in their earlier lawsuit, where Blake compared Swift and her husband to Game of Thrones characters while suggesting creative changes in the rooftop scene, allegedly pressuring Baldoni to comply as he was up against some of the most powerful names. Blake's lawyer further responded with, 'This is what we have come to expect from the Wayfarer parties' lawyers, who appear to love nothing more than shooting first, without any evidence, and with no care for the people they are harming in the process. Taylor Swift's team has previously denied her involvement in the movie or any part of this drama other than giving permission to use her song 'My Tears Ricochet,' to be used in the movie. Taylor was busy touring worldwide during this whole time. 'Taylor Swift never set foot on the set of this movie, she was not involved in any casting or creative decisions, she did not score the film, she never saw an edit or made any notes on the film.' Blake's team, on the other hand, called Justin a 'bully' for trying to drag Taylor into the case. They say Justin's lawyers are turning a serious sexual harassment case into tabloid entertainment. Also read: Blake Lively's team responds to Justin Baldoni's video from the sets of It Ends With Us: 'Every moment of this was improvised with no discussion or consent in advance' Baldoni's lawyer's claims come just a day after Taylor Swift's law firm filed papers fighting the decision to drag the singer into court. According to Page Six, Venable called the subpoena 'an abuse of the discovery process.' They claimed that neither Swift nor her legal team has anything to do with 'the film at issue or any of the claims or defenses asserted in the underlying lawsuit,' adding, 'There is no reason for this subpoena other than to distract from the facts of the case and impose undue burden and expense on a non-party.' Back in December 2024, Blake Lively sued her co-star and director of It Ends With Us, Justin Baldoni, on sexual harassment charges alongside other abuse claims, including launching a smear campaign against her. In retaliation, Justin denies everything and in January counter-sued Blake and Ryan Reynolds, fighting back with a $400 million countersuit accusing Blake and others of defamation and extortion.
Yahoo
05-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
A law associate making $300,000 a year at Skadden Arps quit over the firm's deal with Donald Trump
When Rachel Cohen took a job as an associate at Skadden Arps in Chicago three years ago, she expected long hours, some tedious work, and extremely good pay. What she wasn't expecting was to be thrust into the middle of a crisis involving her white shoe firm and the president of the United States. In the first few months of his administration, Donald Trump has taken aim at policies he disagrees with in both the public and private sector. But law firms as a category have come under special scrutiny; Trump has signed a number of executive orders targeting specific major legal practices by name. Trump accuses these firms of things like undermining elections, unlawful hiring practices, and attempting to limit constitutional freedoms through certain pro bono work. But the firms that he has targeted all have one thing in common: They have previously butted heads with Trump, or supported Democrats. The increased and unprecedented scrutiny have prompted nine firms, including Paul Weiss, Willkie Farr, and Skadden Arps, to preemptively strike deals with the president, pledging a total of $940 million in free legal work thus far. 'Skadden is pleased to have achieved a successful agreement with President Trump and his Administration," executive partner Jeremy London said in a March 28 statement posted by Trump on the president's social media platform, Truth Social. 'We firmly believe that this outcome is in the best interests of our clients, our people, and our Firm.' Cohen could not have felt more strongly that the firm was taking a wrong turn. 'I felt the firm was on the wrong side of history,' she says. Cohen was brought into the firm as a financial specialist to work on large M&A transactions, and had been there a little under three years when Skadden made the announcement. Cohen said she first started noticing a slight shift in attitude at the firm after the president began taking aim at other major legal practices. 'When Trump started coming for law firms based on past representation, it was so outside the bounds of the normal and a clear intimidation technique, so I was shocked when there was no immediate response from the company; it struck me as strange,' she says. Skadden did not reply to Fortune's request for comment. On March 17 the firm was among many hit with a demand letter from acting chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Andrea Lucas, requesting information about the firm's DEI-related employment practices, alleging a potential violation of the Civil Rights Act. With many associates, including herself, seeing the letter as a 'clear intimidation tactic,' Cohen assumed at this point that Skadden would speak up and strike back, but that didn't happen. 'We knew nothing because the firm wouldn't talk about it,' she says. Feeling concerned about the firm's future and what she saw as its lackadaisical approach to the president's demands, Cohen went to the press to address her concerns. She expected to be disciplined by management for her actions, which she says were clearly against company policy. But besides a couple light-hearted warnings, the company did nothing. Cohen says that she believes that was because it was looking to mitigate bad press on the issue. 'They were going to just let me stomp my feet and tucker myself out like a toddler and then push me out at the end of the year once the media attention died off,' Cohen says. Skadden did not reply to Fortune's repeated requests for comment. In the meantime, in addition to committing 'at least' $100 million in pro bono legal work for causes the administration supports, Skadden has also made efforts to dismantle DEI programs, by overhauling their current hiring strategy and putting an end to their employee resource groups, Bloomberg Law reports. Cohen wasn't the only one who was outraged. Earlier this month, a group of more than 80 alumni from Skadden sent a letter to London protesting the firm's deal with Trump. 'In light of Skadden's position, it is outrageous and self-interested that rather than fulfilling the legal profession's oath and standing in solidarity with fellow law firms that were fighting to uphold the Constitution, Skadden caved to bullying tactics instead,' the letter states. Concerned that the firm was moving in a direction that violated her own ethics, Cohen quit Skadden on March 20. In doing so, she left behind a compensation package that she estimates would be more than $300,000 this year. Cohen isn't the only one to leave her job at a major law firm over its arrangements with the Trump administration. A leading federal contracts lawyer at Perkins Coie reportedly left the firm over its deal with Trump, and more than half a dozen associates at other firms have quit publicly due to their company's deals with the president. This includes lawyers who previously worked at Kirkland, Latham, Simpson Thacher, and Willkie Farr, which have all made deals with the administration to offer pro bono services as well as commitments to 'not engage in illegal DEI discrimination,' the president announced on Truth Social last month. None of these firms responded to Fortune's repeated requests for comment. Some law student organizations are also taking a stance. One current JD student at Georgetown Law, Caleb Frye, says the student group he helps run, which works to place top graduates at major energy-focused law firms, recently sent a letter to Skadden canceling a networking event with the company due to its deal with Trump. 'We go to big firms like Skadden because we think that we're going to get the best training opportunities, the best career development,' Frye, student and co-president of the Georgetown Energy Law Group, tells Fortune. 'But now, I can't look people in my group in the eye and tell them that they're going to get the best training opportunities at a firm that isn't even willing to litigate on behalf of its own constitutional rights.' Earlier this month, the National Institute for Workers' Rights filed an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against Skadden. The group alleges that the firm engaged in unfair labor practices by making efforts to restrict the email access of employees expressing concerns, submitting resignations, and planning 'coordinated rejections of recruitment activities' over its Trump agreement. Skadden did not reply to Fortune's repeated request for comment. Some law firms that were targeted by Trump are pushing back on the administration. After the president issued an executive order against Susman Godfrey, accusing the firm of weaponizing the American legal system and 'degrading the quality of American elections,' the firm sued him. On April 15, a federal judge granted the firm's request for temporary relief from the order, the New York Times reported. As for Cohen, she's unsure of her future, but says it will likely be outside of the legal profession. She says she feels what Skadden is doing is much larger than just promising free legal work to the president, adding the company's actions have led her to question the ethics of management and reduced her faith in the entire legal system. 'I don't know if there's a law after this,' says Cohen. 'It seems like the country is moving towards kangaroo courts and I'm certainly not going to commit myself to the practice of law as a full-time job until I see how things unfold.' This story was originally featured on
Reuters
09-04-2025
- Business
- Reuters
Some lawyers split with their firms over response to Trump's attacks
April 9 (Reuters) - As most major law firms stay silent on U.S. President Donald Trump's executive orders targeting the legal industry, some of the firms' lawyers are pushing back on their own. More than 330 partners from the largest U.S. firms by revenue joined an online effort this week to organize potential court filings and internal discussions at their firms, which are facing a stark choice between resisting Trump or seeking peace with the administration. Separately, Joseph Baio, a senior lawyer at Willkie Farr, resigned from the firm after it struck a deal with Trump to avoid an executive order that could have crippled its business, the New York Times reported on Wednesday. Andrew Silberstein, who was an associate at Willkie Farr, confirmed to Reuters that he also resigned because of the firm's agreement. An email response from Baio's Willkie address said he has left the firm. He did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Willkie Farr did not respond to a request for comment. Neel Chatterjee, a partner at Goodwin Procter who organized the online partner group, said in a Sunday LinkedIn post launching the effort that many partners disagreed with their employers' decisions not to back other firms hit with punishing executive orders. It was a "hard day," he wrote, when neither Goodwin nor his former firm signed onto a Friday court brief supporting Perkins Coie, one of the firms targeted by Trump. He told Reuters that the group may file friend-of-the-court briefs on its own. Goodwin did not immediately respond to a request for comment. More than 500 law firms signed Friday's brief denouncing Trump's targeting of Perkins Coie and other firms, expressing alarm over the Republican president's crackdown on the legal profession. Most of the largest U.S. firms did not sign the brief, however. That reticence "doesn't mean there weren't many partners within those firms that wished for a different result," said Haley Morrison, a Portland, Oregon-based partner at law firm Epstein Becker Green who is part of the online group. Her firm had no immediate comment. Trump to date has signed executive orders targeting five firms, including orders that restricted their lawyers' access to government officials and threatened to cancel federal contracts held by their clients. He has also directed officials to probe more firms over their internal diversity policies and their involvement in lawsuits against the federal government. Three of the firms hit with executive orders - Perkins Coie, WilmerHale and Jenner & Block - sued Trump in response, asserting that the orders violate the U.S. Constitution and winning rulings that have temporarily blocked them. Another firm hit with one of Trump's orders, Paul Weiss, reached a deal with the president that led to the directive being rescinded. Three other firms – Milbank, Willkie Farr & Gallagher and Skadden Arps – reached deals with Trump without being hit with an order against them, agreeing to provide free legal work to causes the president supports. Trump has said more firms are seeking similar deals. "They're all lining up," he said at a White House event on Monday. Doug Emhoff, the husband of former Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris, Trump's 2024 election opponent, had told Willkie Farr's leadership that he disagreed with a decision to seek a deal with the Trump administration and said they should fight back, a person familiar with the matter told Reuters. Emhoff, who joined the firm after the election, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. At least two associates at Skadden have quit the firm since it reached its agreement with Trump. Another who resigned from Skadden days before the agreement, Rachel Cohen, criticized the deals in testimony before an informal hearing of Congressional Democrats on Monday. Groups of lawyers that previously worked at Skadden and Paul Weiss separately sent letters to their former employers criticizing the deals. Paul Weiss, Skadden and Milbank did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The agreements raise "the troubling prospect" that the Republican president unlawfully coerced the firms to allocate millions of dollars "to support his pet issues, making statements that support his agenda, and reversing firm policies he disagrees with," U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland, both Democrats, wrote in letters this week to the four firms that have struck deals.
