“This Was Not Started by Us”: The ‘It Ends With Us’ Battle Hits the Courtroom

by

On Monday, U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman instructed the lawyers involved in the dispute between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni to adhere to a federal court guideline that prohibits attorneys from issuing public comments that might influence the ongoing case’s outcome.

The judge handed down the decree following Bryan Freedman’s assertion that Lively’s legal team proposed a possible gag order against him. In contrast, Michael Gottlieb, acting for the actress, stated they were not demanding a complete gag order but instead seeking a judicial directive to adhere to current regulations concerning trial publicity.

In support of the requested order, Gottlieb referred to accusations made by Freedman in various media outlets against Lively, claiming a pattern of bullying and possessing evidence to back up these claims. This evidence was said to be published in places like People magazine and on The Megyn Kelly Show. Additionally, Gottlieb mentioned a recently created website by Freedman’s team, which presents the chronology of the conflict between Lively and Baldoni but offers a biased interpretation, as stated by Gottlieb.

He also mentioned that his group intends to challenge the inclusion of that timeline and storyline in the revised lawsuit brought forth by Freedman. Subsequently, Freedman read aloud comments made by Gottlieb’s team in the media, but Liman warned, “You went a bit too far with that,” despite Freedman stating they had to respond to the initial article about Lively’s complaint published in the New York Times.

“This was not started by us,” Freedman said.

Apart from consenting to abide by the court’s guidelines regarding media interactions prior to a formal order, Liman expressed his agreement with a sense of hesitation, fearing the case might escalate into additional legal disputes concerning attorney statements. If ongoing issues arise, he mentioned that he may expedite the trial date to prevent influencing potential jurors, although he remains cautious about this due to the extensive evidence collection needed beforehand. Freedman contended that harm has already been inflicted before the jury’s verdict is rendered.

“That’s the reason you each have sued,” Liman countered.

Today marked the initial court session for the combined legal actions filed by Lively and Baldoni. Although their lawsuits are now merged into a single case, the dispute between publicists Stephanie Jones and Jennifer Abel continues to be handled independently.

Despite the ongoing process of discovery involving multiple parties, the trial date set for March 2026 remains unchanged. Freedman has recently submitted an updated complaint, including The New York Times as a defendant. Gottlieb hinted that his team might also revise their complaint to include new defendants and allegations without providing specific details.

Freedman expressed great satisfaction with how the case was managed today, stating that they will work diligently and aim to demonstrate their innocence swiftly,” Freedman said at a press conference following the court hearing.

On a Monday morning in lower Manhattan, the initial court hearing took place, kickstarting the highly anticipated legal battle. This hearing was initially slated for February 12th, but due to repeated concerns from attorneys representing Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds, that lawyer Freedman – based in Los Angeles – might be breaching ethical attorney conduct by publicly litigating (especially in the press and tabloids), Liman – Doug Liman’s brother – decided to bring the hearing forward.

Instead of Baldoni, Lively, and Reynolds showing up, a sizable group of lawyers from different parties arrived instead.

In her recently filed lawsuit during the Christmas season, Lively claimed that her director and co-star from “It Ends With Us,” along with others, engaged in sexual harassment and launched a negative campaign against her following the movie’s release as a method of diverting attention and retaliation. Named in the suit were Jamey Heath (partner at Wayfarer Studios with Baldoni), crisis PR executive Melissa Nathan, and Wayfarer publicist Jennifer Abel. Lively is being represented by law firms Manatt, Phelps & Phillips and Willkie Farr & Gallagher.

I, as a passionate fan, found myself compelled to share the news that Baldoni took legal action for a whopping $400 million against both Lively and Reynolds, accusing them of extortion and defamation. In addition to this dynamic duo, he’s also targeting Lively’s longtime publicist Leslie Sloane and L.A. publicist Stephanie Jones in the lawsuit. To make matters even more intriguing, Baldoni and Freedman are also aiming at The New York Times, as they detailed Lively’s accusations in a comprehensive exposé.

The dispute between Lively-Baldoni has brought attention to the practice known as “astroturfing,” where professionals manipulate online platforms to influence public opinion on social media. As stated in Lively’s lawsuit, this alleged orchestrated campaign reportedly had significant effects, causing her distress, negatively impacting her family life, and hindering her business endeavors.

In her lawsuit, Ms. Lively aims to correct the record, make Wayfarer Parties and Associates answer for their actions, and expose a fresh type of retaliation that should not be used against those who speak out against sexual harassment. To put it simply, Mr. Baldoni has been projecting an image of himself as not just supportive but also vigilant in women’s rights. However, contradictory to this image, as detailed earlier, Mr. Baldoni has been using considerable time and resources in his attempts to ‘bury’ and ‘destroy’ Ms. Lively for voicing concerns about his and his CEO’s inappropriate behavior and other questionable actions.

Baldoni’s team maintains that the pro-Baldoni posts on social media against Lively are genuine and not manipulated or prearranged by them.

The vocal Freedman often maintains that his client is the actual victim, and he claims that the movie “It Ends With Us” was taken from him by Lively during post-production due to the influence they and Reynolds wielded in the industry.

Instead of responding specifically to Lively’s grievances about Baldoni’s on-set conduct in the film, Freedman has chosen a different approach by sharing texts, voice notes, and videos with the media, intending to contradict her account as presented in her lawsuit, which claims that other women also experienced discomfort.

Before the hearing, Lively’s legal team contended that Freedman’s repeated disclosures and remarks might be intended to hide the fact that Ms. Lively possesses a multitude of further correspondences relevant to her allegations.

In the January 27th letter requesting a gag order, it was argued that allowing Mr. Freedman’s actions would lead to a competitive disclosure of text messages to the media – an activity not endorsed nor allowed by Rule 3.6 or federal rules. The parties involved in the case, known as the Wayfarer Parties, had their own lawsuits against various parties and were provided ample room to incorporate any text messages or related context in their legal filings that they believed supported their claims.

Read More

2025-02-03 22:25