Photo credit: www.thewrap.com
Blake Lively’s legal team has taken significant steps in her ongoing legal conflict, issuing subpoenas to multiple wireless carriers and crisis public relations consultant Jed Wallace. This action aims to clarify the claims made by Justin Baldoni, particularly regarding the existence of supposed evidence that his representatives allege to possess.
Among those subpoenaed are major telecommunications companies such as AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, Cloudflare Inc., and AOL. These subpoenas mark a pivotal development in the actors’ protracted legal dispute linked to the film “It Ends With Us,” as reported by TheWrap.
According to Lively’s attorneys, Mike Gottlieb and Esra Hudson, this move signifies Lively’s commitment to uncover the individuals and strategies that they believe have unjustly tarnished her reputation and that of her family over the past year. They noted, “We will now receive all of the ‘receipts’ that, unsurprisingly, are nowhere to be found on Mr. [Bryan] Freedman’s website, and like Ms. Lively, those ‘receipts’ will have their day in court.”
Recently, Freedman and Baldoni launched TheLawsuitInfo.com, a website intended to present a timeline of events and their revised complaint, which includes numerous screenshots of communications between the involved parties. Freedman has yet to respond to the latest legal maneuvers.
Freedman described the decision to amend the lawsuit as a natural progression, citing a surge of new evidence supporting their claims. He asserted that Lively and her team had engaged in a concerted effort to damage reputations through what he characterized as a complex web of falsehoods and illicit communication manipulation.
A spokesperson for Lively provided further insights, claiming that Baldoni’s team appeared to celebrate their efforts to shift public perception against Lively. The spokesperson elaborated on the investigation into Wallace’s business practices, indicating a desire to explore his role in any attempts to divert attention from legitimate claims of harassment made by Lively.
This latest development arises in the wake of Wallace’s defamation lawsuit against Lively, where he seeks $7 million in damages, contending that he is not implicated in any smear campaign against her. Lively had previously aimed to depose Wallace in a Texas court concerning allegations of online harassment linked to Baldoni’s public relations strategies, but her petition was withdrawn last week. Nevertheless, Wallace may still face inclusion in Lively’s ongoing lawsuit against Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios.
Documentation submitted by Wallace’s firm maintains that neither he nor his organization had any involvement in the alleged harassment or retaliation experienced by Lively, citing the absence of a contractual relationship with her.
Lively’s representatives emphasized the relevance of the phone records from AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile, suggesting that these could unveil the full cadre of individuals implicated in the campaign against her, providing essential evidence related to the timeline and operational details of the alleged retaliation efforts. Furthermore, they forecast that internet records from Cloudflare Inc. and AOL could shed light on additional individuals potentially involved in the digital aspects of the alleged campaign.
In a counterclaim, Baldoni is suing Lively, her spouse Ryan Reynolds, their publicist, and The New York Times for an astronomical $400 million, alleging that they are responsible for disseminating false narratives, a claim he restructured after discontinuing a separate $250 million defamation action against the newspaper.
The current dispute escalated following Lively’s public accusation against Baldoni for sexual harassment in December. At the first hearing of the case last week, both sides were instructed to adhere to New York’s Rules of Professional Conduct, which restrict remarks that may influence jury opinions. However, they retain the right to engage with the media to defend their narratives—a situation that avoids a gag order.
The upcoming trial is currently scheduled for March 2026, with both parties prepared to present their cases in what has become a highly publicized legal saga.
Source
www.thewrap.com