{"id":6494,"date":"2025-06-14T10:18:10","date_gmt":"2025-06-14T10:18:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/blake-lively-fights-justin-baldonis-request-to-see-taylor-swift-texts\/"},"modified":"2025-06-14T10:18:10","modified_gmt":"2025-06-14T10:18:10","slug":"blake-lively-fights-justin-baldonis-request-to-see-taylor-swift-texts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/blake-lively-fights-justin-baldonis-request-to-see-taylor-swift-texts\/","title":{"rendered":"Blake Lively Fights Justin Baldoni’s Request to See Taylor Swift Texts"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n

\n\tB<\/span>lake Lively is fighting Justin Baldoni\u2019s continued attempts to see her texts with Taylor Swift in the It Ends With Us <\/em>litigation, saying the movie\u2019s director and co-star shouldn\u2019t be allowed to drag Swift into the court battle just to generate \u201csensational headlines.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tLively filed a motion on Friday (June 13) asking a federal judge to shut down Baldoni\u2019s discovery request seeking all communications between the actress and Swift, her longtime close friend, related to It Ends With Us <\/em>or Lively\u2019s lawsuit alleging Baldoni sexually harassed her on the film\u2019s set and then orchestrated a smear campaign in retaliation for her complaints.<\/p>\n

\n\tBaldoni and his production company, Wayfarer Studios, previously sought these communications via subpoenas to Swift and her lawyers. But the pop superstar\u2019s reps vehemently opposed the subpoenas as \u201ctabloid clickbait,\u201d and Baldoni withdrew the requests last month.<\/p>\n

\n\tAccording to the Friday filing, Lively\u2019s team is unsure whether Swift handed over any texts as part of a deal with Baldoni to get the subpoenas dropped. Though Swift\u2019s attorney advised them that \u201cno documents are being produced,\u201d the same day, a Daily Mail<\/em> article<\/a> quoted an \u201cinsider\u201d stating that the Wayfarer team got \u201cexactly what they were seeking\u201d from the pop star.<\/p>\n

\n\tLawyers for Lively say this \u201cinsider\u201d quote, published by a Daily Mail<\/em> reporter with known ties to Baldoni\u2019s publicists, could be interpreted either to mean that Swift produced documents or that the hefty tabloid coverage of Swift\u2019s subpoena was enough to achieve Baldoni\u2019s aims.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cEither interpretation of the reason the Wayfarer parties withdrew the subpoenas warrants the entry of a protective order,\u201d write Lively\u2019s attorneys. \u201cIf the Wayfarer parties received documents from Ms. Swift such that they have \u2018exactly what they\u2019 need, then the discovery sought \u2026 is cumulative and duplicative, and need not be produced again by Ms. Lively.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cIf, on the other hand,\u201d Lively\u2019s lawyers continue, \u201cthe Wayfarer parties were \u2018seeking\u2019 only sensational headlines by serving the subpoenas rather than materials to support their claims and defenses, they are not entitled to the information\u2026 The purpose of civil discovery is to obtain information relevant to claims and defenses in court, not to prop up a public relations narrative outside of court.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tSome of the \u201dsensational headlines\u201d generated by the Swift subpoena revolved around allegations from Baldoni\u2019s lawyers that Lively had asked Swift to delete text messages and tried to extort her into voicing public support for the sexual harassment lawsuit. \u00a0These claims, attributed to an anonymous source and denounced by Lively\u2019s team as \u201ccategorically false,\u201d were struck from the case\u2019s docket after Judge Lewis J. Liman determined they were improper, irrelevant and \u201cpotentially libelous.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tJudge Liman dealt another loss to Baldoni earlier this week when he threw out the actor-director\u2019s defamation countersuit, which alleged that Lively conspired with the New York Times, <\/em>her husband Ryan Reynolds and publicist Leslie Sloane<\/strong> to fabricate the sexual harassment and retaliation claims.<\/p>\n

\n\tA rep for Lively cited this dismissal ruling in a statement to Billboard <\/em>regarding Baldoni\u2019s continued pursuit of the actress\u2019 communications with Swift.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cThe ongoing attempts to once again try and use the world\u2019s biggest star as a PR tactic in this matter reflects a public unraveling of epic proportions \u2014 and serves only to distract from the fact that Justin Baldoni\u2019s lawsuits against Ms. Lively, Ryan Reynolds, their publicist and the New York Times<\/em> have been entirely dismissed,\u201d said a Lively spokesperson on Friday (June 13).<\/p>\n

\n\tReps for Baldoni and Swift did not return requests for comment.<\/p>\n

\n\tThe continued fight over the Swift text messages comes as Lively is serving her own subpoena on the singer\u2019s public opponent, Scooter Braun<\/strong>. Lively wants to know what Braun knows about the alleged smear campaign orchestrated by publicity firm The Agency Group PR, a controlling stake of which is reportedly owned by Braun\u2019s company, HYBE America.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Blake Lively is fighting Justin Baldoni\u2019s continued attempts to see her texts with Taylor Swift in the It Ends With Us litigation, saying the movie\u2019s director and co-star […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":6495,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[5951,4554,1288,2001,5874,2207,3029,3028,1546],"class_list":["post-6494","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-lawyers","tag-baldonis","tag-blake","tag-fights","tag-justin","tag-lively","tag-request","tag-swift","tag-taylor","tag-texts"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6494","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6494"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6494\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6495"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6494"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6494"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6494"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}