New York — Taylor Swift is unlikely to testify in a legal dispute involving actors Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni. U.S. District Judge Lewis J. Liman recently denied Baldoni’s petition for an extension that would have allowed more time to arrange a deposition with the singer before the upcoming discovery deadline on September 30. While Lively received a new deadline of October 10 for her own requests, it appears Swift’s participation will not be necessary.
Baldoni’s attorney, Bryan Freedman, initially sought additional time, claiming in a letter to the judge that Swift was prepared to provide deposition testimony. He noted that she could not do so before October 20 due to her existing professional commitments. However, an attorney representing Swift rebutted this claim, affirming that the pop star had not agreed to deposition but could possibly find time later in October, should the parties resolve their issues.
The legal conflict originated in December when Lively filed a lawsuit against Baldoni, her co-star in the film “It Ends With Us.” She accused him, along with his colleagues at Wayfarer Studios, of sexual harassment and participating in a retaliatory smear campaign against her after she reported the harassment. Baldoni and the studio deny the allegations.
Swift’s involvement became notable when Baldoni filed a countersuit against Lively and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, seeking $400 million in damages for defamation and extortion. However, this countersuit was dismissed by Judge Liman in June. Within court filings, Baldoni claimed he felt pressured to accept script changes at a meeting with Lively, Swift, and Reynolds, asserting they had summoned him to their New York City residence.
In a text exchange following this meeting, Lively allegedly referred to her interactions with Reynolds and Swift using a metaphor from HBO’s “Game of Thrones,” labeling them as her “dragons.”
Swift’s legal team anticipated a subpoena demanding her testimony, but they swiftly criticized this attempt, arguing that she had no involvement with the film’s production, casting, or creative decisions. A representative for Swift emphasized that she had never even visited the film set and was on tour during much of the relevant timeframe.
The subpoena was withdrawn shortly thereafter, highlighting a back-and-forth of allegations likely to influence the ongoing case. As this legal battle unfolds, it highlights the complex intersections of celebrity and legal responsibility.
The outcome of Lively’s lawsuit, and the ramifications for all parties involved, remains uncertain as the court’s proceedings advance.
This article was automatically written by Open AI and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by writing an email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.