Category: Blake Lively

Categories
Blake Lively Taylor Swift

People: Taylor Swift & Blake Lively ‘aren’t speaking’, and Taylor wrote a song about it?

people:-taylor-swift-&-blake-lively-‘aren’t-speaking’,-and-taylor-wrote-a-song-about-it?

Can I ask the Swifties something? Have any of Taylor Swift’s albums ever had leaks like this? I remember just a week before The Tortured Poets Department came out, there were some leaks of the songs and the lyrics, and people started to figure out that many of the songs were about Matt Healy, much to the Swifties’ chagrin. But The Life of a Showgirl isn’t coming out until October, and there are SO MANY leaks. Several of the cover-art photos were leaked a week before Taylor even announced the album. Last week, the Daily Mail had a big exclusive about how TLOAS’s songs. They said that Taylor has a song about the accusations that her relationship is a PR stunt, a few political songs (which might even be anti-Trump) and at least one song about her friendship breakup with Blake Lively. I saw that Mail piece and I was like… damn, who leaked all of that? Well now People’s sources are suggesting that Taylor’s new song “Ruin the Friendship” is absolutely about Blake, and the two women are not speaking.

Taylor Swift and Blake Lively are currently not in communication. Their longtime friendship has been under public scrutiny since Swift’s name was brought into Lively’s ongoing legal battle with her It Ends With Us costar and director Justin Baldoni, which began in December 2024.

Now, a source close to the situation tells PEOPLE, “Taylor and Blake aren’t speaking.”

Swift, 35, has come up several times during the actress’ legal war with Baldoni, 41. The superstar’s name was first brought into the mix when Baldoni’s legal team alleged that Swift had pressured him to accept Lively’s rewrites on the movie in a complaint Baldoni filed in January that has since been dismissed. Later, in May, Baldoni’s legal team dropped the subpoena they’d issued to Swift. Swift’s rep claimed the subpoena was “designed to use Taylor Swift’s name to draw public interest by creating tabloid clickbait instead of focusing on the facts of the case.”

On Aug. 13 Swift announced the upcoming release of her new album, The Life of a Showgirl, which will include a song titled “Ruin the Friendship,” that fans are speculating is about her relationship with Lively, 37.

In April, a source told PEOPLE that Swift “was really hurt” after she was implicated in Lively and Baldoni’s legal case, and in May a source told PEOPLE that her friendship with Lively “has halted.” At that time, another insider said that while the pair were “taking some space,” they were “not no longer friends.” Two months later, a source told PEOPLE that Lively and Swift were working toward being “on good terms,” though their friendship “isn’t the same as it was before.”

[From People]

That last part of People’s article is hilarious, because they’re quoting their own coverage and trying to hide the fact that Blake’s publicist and Taylor’s publicist are both pushing stories about the friend-split, but the publicists are contradicting one another. I’ve believed for months that Taylor was and perhaps still is quite pissed with what Blake did, and how Blake was clearly parlaying her relationship with Taylor behind-the-scenes. Taylor feels used, and she has every right to feel that way. I’m interested in hearing “Ruin the Friendship” – Taylor is usually at her most savage when she’s writing/singing about women, not men. I will die if the song is basically Bleach Blonde Bad Blood Butch Body.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid and Cover Images.

Categories
Blake Lively Justin Baldoni Taylor Swift

The judge ruled that Justin Baldoni can access Taylor Swift & Blake Lively’s texts

the-judge-ruled-that-justin-baldoni-can-access-taylor-swift-&-blake-lively’s-texts

Back in May, there were some crazy rumors and stories flying around about Blake Lively and Taylor Swift. Justin Baldoni’s lawyer claimed that they had it on good authority that Blake tried to convince Taylor to delete emails or texts having to do with It Ends with Us. Blake’s lawyers fought back in court, arguing that Taylor wasn’t part of the situation whatsoever. Taylor’s lawyers also got involved and it was chaotic for a second. Then Baldoni’s lawyers dropped their documents subpoena, a bizarre move given everything they said in court. Deadline reported that “Part of the reason the summons was dropped was because details that the Bryan Freedman-represented Baldoni and crew sought were provided, I hear.” As in, Taylor and her team turned over everything Team Baldoni wanted. Well, last week, Blake’s team went to court to say that Team Baldoni should not have access to any of the communications between Swift and Lively. The judge said… not so fast.

A judge ruled Wednesday that Justin Baldoni can obtain messages between Blake Lively and Taylor Swift that pertain to “It Ends With Us” and the legal melee between the film’s co-stars. Lively had asked Judge Lewis Liman to prevent Baldoni from obtaining such messages, arguing that Baldoni was dragging Swift into the conflict as part of a public relations strategy.

But in his order on Wednesday, Liman found that such messages may be relevant to the case, and that a protective order is in place to prevent them from leaking to the press.

“A motion or request may be, and in this case often has been, both a legitimate litigation tactic and an attempt to maneuver in the broader court of public opinion,” the judge wrote.

Baldoni’s team previously subpoenaed Swift and her attorneys. At the time, Swift’s spokesman issued a statement saying that Swift had nothing to do with the film beyond licensing a song, and had not even seen it until weeks after its release. Swift’s team moved to quash the subpoenas, and Baldoni’s side withdrew them. Lively’s team then sought to close off the issue once and for all, arguing that Swift is irrelevant to the case. But the judge was not persuaded of that.

“Given that Lively has represented that Swift had knowledge of complaints or discussions about the working environment on the film, among other issues, the requests for messages with Swift regarding the film and this action are reasonably tailored to discover information that would prove or disprove Lively’s harassment and retaliation claims,” the judge wrote.

[From Variety]

I agree with the judge’s ruling here – the communications are absolutely relevant. It feels like they’re even more relevant to the case because of the outsized focus on the documents and whether Baldoni’s team can have access to them. I’d really like to know if Deadline’s source was correct last month as well, and that Taylor’s people turned over documents to Baldoni’s side and that’s why Baldoni withdrew the summons. Hm.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

Categories
Blake Lively Justin Baldoni

Justin Baldoni’s lawyer: Blake Lively’s declaration of victory is ‘false’

justin-baldoni’s-lawyer:-blake-lively’s-declaration-of-victory-is-‘false’

On Monday, the judge dismissed Justin Baldoni’s case against Blake Lively, Ryan Reynolds and Blake’s publicist. The judge also dismissed Baldoni’s defamation case against the New York Times. As I said, the dismissal of the NYT lawsuit was not that surprising. However, I was surprised by the judge’s dismissal of the lawsuit against Blake and Ryan. The most bizarre part about it is that Blake and her team acted like they won all of their legal challenges and nothing else was going to court – even with the dismissal, Blake’s lawsuit against Baldoni is proceeding and, before this dismissal, it did not appear that Blake’s case was holding up. Well, it took about 24 hours for Baldoni’s legal team to respond to the dismissal. Unsurprisingly, they’re basically saying it ain’t over ‘til it’s over.

Justin Baldoni’s attorney is breaking his silence after his $400 million countersuit against Blake Lively was dismissed by the judge. In a statement obtained by PEOPLE Tuesday, June 10, the It Ends With Us actor-director’s lawyer Bryan Freedman said Lively and her team’s “predictable declaration of victory is false.”

On June 9, Judge Lewis J. Liman granted motions to dismiss Baldoni’s countersuit against Lively, 37, her husband Ryan Reynolds and their publicist, which alleged extortion and defamation, as well as his $250 million libel lawsuit against The New York Times.

The judge noted that Baldoni’s legal team can still amend the claims for breach of implied covenant and tortious interference with contract, with a deadline of June 23.

“While the Court dismissed the defamation related claims, the Court has invited us to amend four out of the seven claims against Ms. Lively, which will showcase additional evidence and refined allegations,” Freedman said in his statement. He added, “This case is about false accusations of sexual harassment and retaliation and a nonexistent smear campaign, which Ms. Lively’s own team conveniently describes as ‘untraceable’ because they cannot prove what never happened.”

“Most importantly, Ms. Lively’s own claims are no truer today than they were yesterday, and with the facts on our side, we march forward with the same confidence that we had when Ms. Lively and her cohorts initiated this battle and look forward to her forthcoming deposition, which I will be taking,” Freedman added in his statement. “We are grateful for the organic show of support from the public and for the dedication of the internet sleuth community who continue to cover the case with discernment and integrity.”

[From People]

I have the feeling that I’ll be dipping back out of this story in the coming weeks/months. I’m not going to cover it when both sides start leaking bullsh-t around Blake’s deposition. People Mag also published some analysis of the dismissals and the case moving forward. They spoke to a lawyer named Gregory Doll, who basically said much the same as Bryan Freedman, that there is still a lot of court proceedings left: “As all litigators know, sometimes you win everything at trial only to see your case reversed on appeal. The decision is undoubtedly a blow to Baldoni. But the case is far from over. One thing I’ve learned many times over as a litigator is not to celebrate too early.” Doll also said that in his opinion, this situation will most likely be settled out of court. I can only see a settlement happening if both Baldoni and Lively agree to a comprehensive NDA, and I just don’t believe that will ever happen.

Here are some photos of Blake at the Chanel Tribeca Festival dinner on Monday night.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

Categories
Blake Lively Justin Baldoni

Justin Baldoni’s lawsuits against Blake Lively & the NYT were both dismissed

justin-baldoni’s-lawsuits-against-blake-lively-&-the-nyt-were-both-dismissed

Back in January, it took Justin Baldoni several weeks to file any kind of response to Blake Lively’s civil rights complaint and lawsuit. On January 16th, Baldoni filed a $400 million lawsuit against Blake, Ryan Reynolds, Blake’s publicist Leslie Sloane, and Sloane’s PR firm. Separately, and weeks earlier, Baldoni and his publicists sued the New York Times for defamation for their exclusive reporting, reporting entirely based on Blake and Leslie Sloane’s narratives. In the past three months or so, we’ve seen an enormous amount of public jockeying and narrative-building from both sides, as well as a slew of pre-trial legal filings. Well, something shocking has happened. Judge Lewis Liman has thrown out both of Baldoni’s lawsuits – the lawsuit against Blake & Ryan, and the lawsuit against the New York Times.

In a major setback for Justin Baldoni, the It Ends With Us director-star’s countersuit against Blake Lively, Ryan Reynolds and their publicist, as well as his lawsuit against The New York Times, have been tossed out by the judge.

On Monday, June 9, Judge Lewis J. Liman granted the motion to dismiss the $400 million lawsuit filed by Baldoni and the Wayfarer Parties against Lively and Reynolds, which alleged extortion and defamation, as well as the $250 million defamation lawsuit against the Times.

The judge noted, though, that Baldoni’s legal team can still amend the claims for breach of implied covenant and tortious interference with contract if they choose to, with a deadline of June 23.

“The Wayfarer Parties have not alleged that Lively is responsible for any statements other than the statements in her CRD complaint, which are privileged,” Judge Liman wrote in the opinion and order filing viewed by PEOPLE. “The Wayfarer Parties have alleged that Reynolds and [publicist Leslie] 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 judge added, “The Wayfarer Parties’ additional claims also fail. Accordingly, the Amended Complaint must be dismissed in its entirety.”

Attorneys for Baldoni did not immediately respond to PEOPLE’s request for comment.

Lively’s lawyers Esra Hudson and Mike Gottlieb call the decision a “total victory and a complete vindication” for the actress and the others whom “Justin Baldoni and the Wayfarer Parties dragged into their retaliatory lawsuit, including Ryan Reynolds, Leslie Sloane and The New York Times. As we have said from day one, this ‘$400 million’ lawsuit was a sham, and the Court saw right through it,” they say in the statement, adding that “we look forward to the next round, which is seeking attorneys’ fees, treble damages and punitive damages” from the Wayfarer parties who they say “perpetrated this abusive litigation.”

[From People]

If I’m being honest, I can understand how Baldoni’s lawsuit against the NYT was tossed out. It wasn’t straight-forward defamation, it was just slanted, biased reporting from the NYT. Do I still think that there were issues which could have been adjudicated at trial? For sure. Same with Baldoni’s case against Blake, Ryan, et al. You can nitpick Baldoni’s case (just as you can nitpick Blake’s case against Baldoni), but it’s wild to say that none of Baldoni’s case should go to trial.

In the wake of these dismissals, People Magazine exclusively reported that Blake “cried with relief.” A source told People: “She’s obviously relieved. They both are. She feels vindicated. Everyone is happy.” Blake also posted a statement on her IG Stories (I’m including it below). She said, in part: “Like so many others, I’ve felt the pain of a retaliatory lawsuit, including the manufactured shame that tries to break us. While the suit against me was defeated, so many don’t have the resources to fight back.”

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Avalon Red, Cover Images, Blake’s IG.

Categories
Blake Lively Justin Baldoni Taylor Swift

Blake Lively & Taylor Swift ‘aren’t as close’ & ‘their friendship isn’t the same’

blake-lively-&-taylor-swift-‘aren’t-as-close’-&-‘their-friendship-isn’t-the-same’

In recent days, Blake Lively’s lawyers informed Justin Baldoni’s legal team that Blake intended to withdraw her claim of “emotional distress” from her lawsuit. Baldoni’s team pointed out that A) Lively had refused to turn over any of her medical records or therapy records which would prove “emotional distress,” and B) that she was not withdrawing her emotional distress claim with prejudice (meaning, she wanted to have the right to refile at a later time). Well, long story short, there was a hearing. Baldoni’s side doesn’t get to “compel” Lively to turn over her records, but Lively doesn’t get to refile any specific emotional distress claim.

The judge overseeing the Blake Lively vs. Justin Baldoni lawsuit has decided that the actress’ claims for emotional distress are dead. The ruling comes after a tense back in forth between the dueling sides, with Baldoni’s lawyers filing a motion to compel her to turn over her medical records and Lively fighting that move.

Judge Lewis Liman wrote this morning that Baldoni’s motion to compel is denied “based on Plaintiff’s representation that the relevant claims will be withdrawn. Lively’s request that ‘because the parties have agreed to dismiss Ms. Lively’s tenth and eleventh causes of action . . . the Court exercise its inherent authority and authority under Rule 15 to dismiss them without prejudice’ is denied without prejudice to renewal. The parties shall stipulate to whether the dismissal is with or without prejudice, or Lively shall renew her request by formal motion. For avoidance of doubt, if the claims are not dismissed, the Court will preclude Lively from offering any evidence of emotional distress.”

In short, Judge Liman shut down the possibility of Lively changing her mind and turning over her medical records. Lively can choose to try to reach an agreement with Baldoni about dismissing the claims with prejudice — meaning without the right to refile — or she can roll the dice and ask the judge to dismiss the claims without an agreement in a bid to have the court dismiss them without prejudice. Either way, Lively’s attorneys can no longer present evidence of her alleged emotional distress claims.

[From Variety]

If you go to the full Variety story, they included some long-winded comments from Lively’s attorneys, who insist that emotional distress is still part of her case, it’s just that their case is being streamlined, etc. It comes across as Lively’s side overexplaining and trying to convince people that it’s not a loss for Blake.

Interestingly enough, this wasn’t the only big headline from the Baldoni-Lively mess. The Daily Mail had a big story about Blake and Taylor Swift’s falling out, and how Blake is barraging Taylor with texts, emails and messages. According to the Mail’s sources, Taylor hasn’t responded at all and Tay is “ghosting” her after the subpoena drama. Hours later, Team Lively managed to get this exclusive placed in People Mag:

Taylor Swift and Blake Lively have made progress in their relationship. The pop superstar, 35, and the actress are working towards being “on good terms,” but “their friendship isn’t the same as it was before,” a source tells PEOPLE exclusively.

Swift and Lively, 37, “aren’t as close and haven’t been spending as much time together as they did in the past.”

The Grammy winner was dragged into the Gossip Girl alum’s ongoing legal battle with her It Ends With Us co-star and director Justin Baldoni. PEOPLE previously reported that Swift and Lively rekindled their friendship in April after the “Fortnight” singer distanced herself from the actress. According to the insider, “Taylor is working to trust Blake again but it’s going to take some time.”

[From People]

I have my theories about what’s really happening between Blake and Taylor Swift, and if I’m even partially right, Blake is doing herself no favors by running to People Mag to give them exclusive updates on their friendship. Even in Blake’s narrative, she’s fallen out with one of the most powerful women in entertainment. That alone should make Blake pause and stop briefing People. Taylor is all about control – image-control, control of the narrative, control of her business. All I’m saying is that even if Taylor wants to give Blake another chance, Taylor is probably disgusted that Blake keeps running to People and using Taylor’s name in this way.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images.

Categories
Blake Lively Justin Baldoni

Variety: Blake Lively ‘is attempting to withdraw’ her claim of emotional distress

variety:-blake-lively-‘is-attempting-to-withdraw’-her-claim-of-emotional-distress

Less than two weeks ago, Justin Baldoni’s legal team ended up dropping their documents subpoena on Taylor Swift. It was a bizarre move and the only reasonable explanation came from a Deadline exclusive, which was that Baldoni’s team dropped the subpoena because Taylor turned over all of the relevant documents. Baldoni’s team wanted text messages and emails between Taylor and Blake Lively, and anything related to It Ends With Us. Since that happened, there’s been a vibe shift (imo). This might be part of the vibe shift – apparently, Blake Lively is now refusing to turn over her medical and therapeutic records as part of her “emotional distress” claim. Baldoni’s lawyers also say that Lively is trying to withdraw her “emotional distress” claims, even though her lawyers insist that the claims are still part of the case.

Blake Lively is attempting to withdraw her claims against Justin Baldoni of intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent infliction of emotional distress. The move comes after Baldoni’s legal team sought discovery that included her medical records in their efforts to defend the “It Ends With Us” director against her claim that she suffered “severe emotional distress and pain, humiliation, embarrassment, belittlement, frustration and mental anguish.” Lively’s attempt to withdraw the two claims surfaced in a filing Monday by Baldoni’s attorneys, who are seeking to compel the actress to sign a HIPAA release for access to therapy notes and other relevant information.

“Instead of complying with the Medical RFPs, Ms. Lively’s counsel recently advised us, in writing, that Ms. Lively is withdrawing her [infliction of emotional distress] Claims,” today’s filing states. “However, Ms. Lively has refused the Wayfarer Parties’ reasonable request that the withdrawal of such claims be with prejudice. She is only willing to withdraw her claims without prejudice. In other words, Ms. Lively wants to simultaneously: (a) refuse to disclose the information and documents needed to disprove that she suffered any emotional distress and/or that the Wayfarer Parties were the cause; and (b) maintain the right to re-file her IED Claims at an unknown time in this or some other court after the discovery window has closed.”

Lively’s lawyers Esra Hudson and Mike Gottlieb called the filing “a press stunt” and noted that they are merely “streamlining and focusing” her case. “The Baldoni-Wayfarer strategy of filing retaliatory claims has exposed them to expansive new damages claims under California law, rendering certain of Ms. Lively’s original claims no longer necessary. Ms. Lively continues to allege emotional distress, as part of numerous other claims in her lawsuit, such as sexual harassment and retaliation, and massive additional compensatory damages on all of her claims.”

The court will now need to decide whether to compel Lively to turn over the information on her mental health, which she has sought to avoid, or dismiss the two claims with or without prejudice. It is standard procedure in cases alleging physical or emotional injury for the defense to access the plaintiff’s medical records that would shine a light on the root and scope of alleged distress. What is unusual is for a plaintiff to abandon the claims midstream given that it is well known heading into such a lawsuit that medical records will be an unpleasant but inevitable part of the discovery process.

The filing, addressed to Judge Liman in U.S. District Court Southern District of New York and signed by Baldoni attorney Kevin Fritz, offers a window on a back and forth that appears to have played out between lawyers for the dueling sides. It continues: “Ms. Lively cannot have it both ways. If Ms. Lively wants to withdraw her frivolous IED Claims, the Wayfarer Parties are entitled to a dismissal with prejudice to ensure they will not be re-filed. If Ms. Lively is unwilling to stipulate to the dismissal of her IED Claims with prejudice, then the Wayfarer Parties will continue to defend against them, and she must produce her medical information and documents as set forth herein.”

“By alleging that she suffered physical and emotional injuries, Ms. Lively has placed her physical and mental condition at issue and, in turn, must produce relevant information and documents [including] psychiatric records,” today’s filing states. “In other words, Ms. Lively has waived any doctor-patient privilege.”

[From Variety]

I’ve already seen people suggest that Blake is trying to avoid having her medical records released publicly by Baldoni’s team. That’s understandable given the circumstances, but it’s not a real legal strategy. In this siloed situation, Baldoni’s lawyers are correct: Blake made her physical and emotional distress a key part of her lawsuit against Baldoni. Baldoni’s team has every right to examine her claims. If Blake is still making claims of emotional distress (which her lawyers insist she is still doing), then what are Blake’s lawyers doing here?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Categories
Blake Lively Justin Baldoni Taylor Swift

Justin Baldoni’s lawyers dropped their documents subpoena on Taylor Swift

justin-baldoni’s-lawyers-dropped-their-documents-subpoena-on-taylor-swift

Well, well. This is certainly interesting and not the way I thought this story would end. Several weeks ago, Taylor Swift was served with a subpoena. Then, last week, Justin Baldoni’s lawyers made a series of very bold accusations involving Taylor Swift and Blake Lively. Baldoni’s lawyers had subpoenaed Taylor as a witness in the ongoing Baldoni-Lively lawsuits. Without going into every single piece of this sordid backstory, I actually thought Taylor was very much a witness to at least one important piece of the lawsuits, a significant meeting at Blake’s apartment between Blake and Justin. Baldoni’s lawyers claimed all kinds of really incendiary things though, like Blake was threatening to release years of Taylor’s texts, and Blake asked Taylor to delete texts. It was all a bit much, and the judge on the case told Baldoni’s lawyers to drop that part. As far as I know, there were still ongoing discussions about whether Taylor would sit for a deposition, and whether Taylor and Blake’s texts were relevant to the lawsuits. But now Baldoni’s team has backed down from all of that. It’s curious.

Justin Baldoni has dropped the document subpoena that was issued to Taylor Swift in his ongoing legal battle with the singer’s friend Blake Lively.

A spokesperson for Lively confirmed the news on Thursday, May 22, saying in a statement obtained by PEOPLE that they are “pleased” Baldoni’s legal team has “withdrawn their harassing subpoenas to Taylor Swift and her law firm.”

“We supported the efforts of Taylor’s team to quash these inappropriate subpoenas directed to her counsel, and we will continue to stand up for any third party who is unjustly harassed or threatened in the process,” adds the spokesperson.

“The Baldoni and Wayfarer team have tried to put Taylor Swift, a woman who has been an inspiration for tens of millions across the globe, at the center of this case since day one,” Lively’s rep claimed. “Exploiting Taylor Swift’s celebrity was the original plan in Melissa Nathan’s scenario planning document, and it continues to this day. Faced with having to justify themselves in federal court, they folded. At some point they will run out of distractions from the actual claims of sexual harassment and retaliation they are facing.”

Reps for Baldoni did not immediately respond to PEOPLE’s requests for comment. A rep for Swift has not commented to PEOPLE.

[From People]

“The Baldoni and Wayfarer team have tried to put Taylor Swift, a woman who has been an inspiration for tens of millions across the globe, at the center of this case since day one…” I mean… Blake was the one who invited Taylor to that meeting at Blake’s apartment. Blake was the one calling Taylor one of her “dragons” as a threat to Baldoni. I would say that Blake put Taylor in the middle of this situation, and of course Baldoni’s legal team was going to try to speak to Taylor and see what Taylor actually did within the production. What I don’t get is why Team Baldoni has backed down completely. It feels like another shoe is about to drop.

Oh, maybe this is it, per Deadline: “Part of the reason the summons was dropped was because details that the Bryan Freedman-represented Baldoni and crew sought were provided, I hear.” As in, Taylor and her lawyers looked at the meat of the documents subpoena and provided most of what Team Baldoni wanted, so Team Baldoni dropped the summons. That certainly changes the story. “Summons dropped after documents provided” is a lot different than “summons dropped out of nowhere.”

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images.