Photo-illustration: by cutting; Photos: Getty Images
The legal battle between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni continues, in one way or another, to become more disorderly. Both parties continue on the production and deployment of It ends with usWho left last year – she says he harassed her sexually on the set; He said that she diverted the film from him, then broadcast her in the press. Last week, after months of speculation according to which the best friend of Lively (former?) Taylor Swift had been mentioned in one of the Baldoni combinations, the singer was assigned to appear by the Baldoni team as an alleged witness of the alleged intimidation tactics of Lively. Now the Baldoni lawyer accuses Lively of trying to make Swift sing.
Following an attempt by the Lively team to cancel the rapid assignment, the Baldoni lawyer, Bryan Freedman, submitted a letter to the court. In the letter, which was examined by the Cup, Freedman denied the allegation of Lively according to which he sought “unrelevant information” and doubled, accusing Lively of “the falsification of witnesses and the spoliation of evidence”. Quoting an anonymous source that says, “very likely to have reliable information”, Freedman wrote that his team believed that “extorted threats” used “extorted threats” to try to put pressure on SWIFT to delete their text messages. He allegedly alleged that Michael Gottlieb, the lawyer for Lively, had contacted one of the swift lawyers and “asked” that she will make a statement of support. According to Freedman, Gottlieb suggested that if Swift did not comply, “private text messages of a personal nature in possession of Ms. Lively would be published”.
A few hours later, one of the lawyers in Lively, Esra Hudson, submitted a letter to his own letter, slamming Freedman for his “allegations in an anonymous manner and baselessly without any evidence in support”. (This letter was also examined by the Cup.) She said that all of Freedman’s accusations are “unequivocal and obviously false” and said that the goal of her letter had nothing to do with their legal proceedings but was supposed to “whiten the scandalous and defamatory allegations concerning Ms. Lively and opposing the lawyer in the press”. Hudson noted that “in a few minutes” of Freedman’s letter appearing on the court of the court, the media began to write it, with at least one publication affirming its assertions “as a fact”.
Thursday, Freedman insisted in a signed affidavit that he received his information from someone “very closely linked to Taylor Swift”. This mystery person would have told Freedman that the lawyer for Lively “had asked, on behalf of Ms. Lively, that Taylor Swift made a social media declaration in support of Ms. Lively, giving his absence of the Super Bowl that year, and said that if Mrs. Swift did not do it, Mrs. Lively would release 10 years of private texts.”
After Freedman has deposited his affidavit, judge Lewis Liman granted Lively’s request to knock on both his letter and the subsequent affidavit of the file, writing in a document examined by the reduction that the letter was “incorrect”, “out of words for any problem”, and also designed only to “promote the public scandal”.
“It took the court for less than 24 hours to see through the unrelevant, inappropriate and inflammatory accusations of Mr. Freedman, strikes them, withdraw them from the court and warns Mr. Freedman that new misconduct may be confronted with sanctions,” said a spokesperson for Lively in a statement to the reduction.
Lively lawyers are not the only ones trying to keep Swift outside this legal battle – earlier this week, after the initial assignment deposit, a singer spokesperson accused Baldoni lawyers to use the star name to “draw the public interest by creating a tabloid click”. Freedman says it is not their intention and that he is just looking for a discovery linked to their case. That being said, if he was Hoping to have an anti-vivière rhetoric in the headlines, he would do a very good job.
