JUDGE DENIES BLAKE LIVELY’S SUBPOENAS TARGETING JUSTIN BALDONI’S LEGAL TEAM. (PHOTO).

 Judge denies Blake Lively’s subpoenas targeting Justin Baldoni’s legal team

A federal judge on Monday dismissed multiple subpoenas issued by Blake Lively seeking information from co-star Justin Baldoni’s legal team amid their ongoing Hollywood dispute.

In a detailed 17-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman carefully evaluated the relevance of Lively’s subpoenas, emphasizing the “special care” courts must exercise when handling discovery requests between opposing counsel.

Lively alleges that Baldoni and his production company, Wayfarer Studios, orchestrated an online “smear campaign” to damage her reputation after she accused Baldoni of sexual harassment on the set of their 2024 film “It Ends With Us.”

Lively’s lawyers argued that Baldoni’s attorney, Bryan Freedman, worked with high-profile content creators to disparage Lively in the media following her allegations. As a result, Lively’s legal team subpoenaed Freedman for documents related to his agreements with those creators, communications with the press, and even phone records tied to his public comments about Lively.

However, Liman ruled that most of these requests would be protected by attorney-client privilege or attorney work product doctrine. He rejected Lively’s claim that Freedman’s ongoing public statements about her justified lifting these protections.

“Moreover, the relevance of such documents and communications to Lively’s claims is uncertain,” the judge wrote. “Lively does not bring defamation claims against Freedman personally, but against the Wayfarer Parties. The knowledge of the Wayfarer Parties is thus of central importance, not that of Freedman.”

Out of eight subpoena requests, the only ones not blocked involved inquiries about any agreements or payments between Freedman’s firm and the content creators. Yet Freedman’s firm told the court no such documents exist, prompting Liman to question the need for those subpoenas.

At a hearing last week, Lively’s attorney, Michael Gottlieb, suggested that influencers like Candace Owens, Megyn Kelly, and Perez Hilton—clients of Freedman—may have been encouraged to attack Lively publicly in exchange for discounted legal fees. Gottlieb pointed to Owens sharing an “exclusive scoop” and Hilton posting hundreds of pro-Baldoni articles.

Liman found these claims “speculative” and only marginally relevant, noting discovery could explore these issues through other means. He barred Lively from demanding engagement letters of Freedman’s clients.

The judge explained, “It may be relevant whether the content creators acted under direction from Freedman’s firm, but Lively does not need their engagement letters to prove that.”

This ruling, stemming from a countersuit filed by Freedman’s law firm to quash the subpoenas, effectively pauses the discovery battle in New York. The wider legal fight between Lively and Baldoni continues in California.

Previously, Liman dismissed Baldoni’s $400 million defamation and extortion countersuit against Lively in Manhattan but allowed him to amend and refile parts of the complaint.

Lively publicly accused Baldoni of sexual harassment in December 2024, triggering a cascade of media coverage and legal actions between the two actors.