Attorneys for the “It Ends with Us” actress allege that Justin Baldoni and his codefendants have not confirmed if they’ll testify in person.
Blake Lively’s team slams Baldoni’s over Taylor Swift subpoena
Blake Lively’s team has condemned Justin Baldoni’s team’s decision to subpoena Taylor Swift, calling it a blatant attempt to exploit Lively’s friendship for tabloid attention.
unbranded – Entertainment
Blake Lively’s legal battle with “It Ends with Us” costar Justin Baldoni is only just beginning.
The actress and her legal team, whose claims of sexual harassment and defamation against Baldoni were dismissed in a recent ruling, are demanding that Lively’s former castmate and director disclose whether he will testify in person at the actors’ upcoming trial.
Lively’s attorneys allege in an April 7 letter to U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman that Baldoni and his codefendants have not confirmed if they will be providing their testimony in court or via deposition, according to court documents obtained by USA TODAY.
Baldoni’s codefendants include Wayfarer Studios CEO Jamey Heath, Wayfarer Studios cofounder Steve Sarowitz, crisis public relations specialist Melissa Nathan and publicist Jennifer Abel.
The alleged lack of communication, according to Lively’s attorneys, suggests that Baldoni and his colleagues intend to “inform [Lively] at some future undetermined date” of how they will testify in the trial, rather than provide advanced notice.
USA TODAY has reached out to Baldoni’s representatives for comment.
In a 2024 California complaint that was later followed by a lawsuit filed in New York federal court, Lively alleged Baldoni and Heath, a producer on “It Ends with Us,” engaged in inappropriate workplace behavior, then took part in a retaliatory “social manipulation” smear campaign against the actress.
In an April 2 ruling, Judge Liman allowed three of Lively’s 13 legal claims – breach of contract, retaliation, and aiding and abetting in retaliation – to proceed to trial. The 10 remaining claims, including those related to sexual harassment and defamation, were tossed out.
The sexual harassment claims were dismissed due to a jurisdiction issue; Liman wrote that although Lively sued under California law, the alleged misconduct did not take place in the state.
Lively and Baldoni’s trial is currently scheduled to begin May 18.
Blake Lively lawyers say Justin Baldoni’s uncertain trial appearance is ‘strategic’
The clock is ticking in Lively and Baldoni’s upcoming trial, and Lively is sounding the alarm.
In the April 7 letter, Lively’s attorneys said the actress has until April 10 to file a joint pretrial order, which is required to include a “list of all trial witnesses, indicating whether such witnesses will testify in person or by deposition.”
The “Gossip Girl” alum’s legal team said that although they attempted “in good faith” to communicate with Baldoni and his codefendants’ lawyers about their testimony status, the defense refused to “provide this information in the near future or in [their] final witness lists.”
The filing notes that in one email exchange, dated April 6, Baldoni’s attorney, Ellyn Garofalo, said that due to the “court’s limited subpoena power,” the actor’s legal team was “reserving the right to have witnesses appear by [deposition] if they are unwilling or unable to appear in person,” including witnesses who live outside the court’s jurisdiction.
As a result, Lively’s attorneys are demanding that Baldoni and his codefendants submit a response no later than April 8 and that the actress be granted a “limited extension” to turn in her own proposal for deposition witnesses.
“The presence or absence of these parties at trial will substantially affect the presentation of evidence, including the order of witnesses, the parties’ preparation for testimony and this court’s pretrial rulings,” wrote Lively’s attorneys, adding that Lively is “entitled to know” about Baldoni’s attendance of the trial.
The absence of this “straightforward information” from Baldoni and his codefendants “appears designed to manufacture a strategic advantage,” the actress’s legal team added, “by depriving Ms. Lively of information that will substantially influence her ability to complete” the necessary preparations for the trial.
This story has been updated to add new information.
Contributing: KiMi Robinson, USA TODAY