Hollywood’s Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni, known for their roles in “It Ends With Us,” are embroiled in a complicated legal confrontation that includes claims of underhanded legal stratagems and increasingly personal disputes. According to sources, Lively’s attorneys initiated a covert lawsuit in New York through a shell corporation named Vanzan Inc. around September 2024, amidst circulating rumors of a rift between the actors.
The lawsuit filed by Lively’s legal team did not specify defendants and was crafted in ambiguous legal terminology, allowing it to enter the judiciary quietly. Shortly thereafter, Lively’s lawyers issued a subpoena to Baldoni’s ex-publicist, Stephanie Jones, seeking all communications pertaining to Lively, her spouse Ryan Reynolds, and Baldoni.
This legal maneuver facilitated the acquisition of various messages from Jonesworks, Baldoni’s former publicist’s company. These included communications among PR staff supposedly orchestrating a negative media push against Lively during the promotional campaign for their movie.
Reacting sharply to these developments, Baldoni’s attorney, Bryan Freedman, accused Lively of sidestepping standard legal procedures to secretly obtain documents, describing it as an “abuse of process.” Freedman stated they would pursue all available legal remedies in response.
One of the more concerning revelations from the communications is a message from crisis PR consultant Melissa Nathan, stating, “We can bury anyone,” alongside indications of a campaign to “destroy” Lively. Three months after initiating the hidden lawsuit, it was quietly dropped on December 19. The following day, Lively escalated the issue by lodging a complaint with the California Civil Rights Department against Baldoni, alleging sexual harassment and retaliation.
As the year closed, the legal battle intensified with Lively filing a federal suit and Baldoni countering with a defamation claim. In an unfolding thread, attention turned back to Vanzan Inc., a Delaware-based entity connected to Lively under her married name “Blake Reynolds” and previously obscure except for some minor business transactions.
Amid the contention, Lively’s attorney, Esra Hudson, defended the use of Doe lawsuits as legitimate and necessary for prosecuting unidentified unlawful actors. Hudson contended that the lawsuit exposed a concerted effort to tarnish Lively, labeling the outrage from Baldoni’s camp as insincere and legally unfounded.
This complex scenario continues to develop with a court date on the horizon and expected further legal wrangling from both parties involved in the dispute. The case highlights the strategic and often hidden legal battles that can occur behind the glitz of Hollywood celebrity.
Disclaimer: This article was automatically written by AI. Details regarding the people, legal disputes, and corresponding facts may be inaccurate. Corrections or retractions can be requested by contacting contact@publiclawlibrary.org.