0 0 lang="en-GB"> Blake Lively, Ryan Reynolds Seek Gag Order
BIG NEWS unveiling

Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds request gag order for Justin Baldoni’s lawyer due to ‘improper conduct’

Read Time:3 Minute, 28 Second

Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds are seeking legal intervention to silence Justin Baldoni’s lawyer, Bryan Freedman, for alleged “improper conduct” in the high-profile legal battle between Lively and Baldoni.

The motion for a gag order was filed after Freedman released unedited, behind-the-scenes footage of a slow-dance scene from the filming of It Ends With Us. While Baldoni’s legal team claims the footage disproves Lively’s allegations of sexual harassment, Lively’s camp argues the video serves as “damning evidence” supporting her claims.

Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively.
Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively filed a new motion against Justin Baldoni’s legal team.Getty Images
They demanded a gag order be placed on Baldoni’s lawyer Bryan Freedman.A

The Allegations Against Baldoni

Lively, known for her role in A Simple Favor, filed a lawsuit in December accusing Baldoni, an actor and director best known for Jane the Virgin, of sexual harassment and “disturbing” on-set behavior. Additionally, she alleged that Baldoni and his public relations team orchestrated a retaliatory smear campaign against her.

The letter alleges that Freedman’s public statements could sway public opinion and impact a future jury.APEX / MEGA
The motion came after Freedman released unedited footage from the “It Ends With Us” shoot.

Freedman’s Media Campaign Sparks Controversy

According to the motion filed by Lively and Reynolds’ legal team, Freedman has been conducting an aggressive media campaign, including giving interviews, making inflammatory public statements, and leaking legal documents to the press. The motion claims Freedman’s actions are part of a broader strategy to undermine Lively’s credibility and sway public opinion, which could compromise a potential jury trial.

Lively filed a sexual harassment complaint — and subsequent lawsuit — against Baldoni in December 2024.GC Images
She claimed he exhibited “disturbing” and “unprofessional” behavior on set.Christopher Peterson / SplashNews.com

“As Ms. Lively’s counsel have attempted, repeatedly, to caution Mr. Freedman, federal litigation must be conducted in court and according to the relevant rules of professional conduct,” the motion states.

The couple’s lawyers argued that Freedman’s public statements are a deliberate effort to retaliate against Lively, mirroring the allegations in her initial cease-and-desist letter. They also accused Freedman of planning to launch a website aimed at discrediting Lively’s claims.

Footage Sparks Debate

The unedited footage released by Freedman has become a focal point in the dispute. Baldoni’s team argues the 10-minute video disproves Lively’s portrayal of events, while Lively’s camp insists it supports her allegations. The footage has not been made public but was reportedly leaked to members of the Hollywood press and tabloid media.

The “Jane the Virgin” alum denied the allegations and countersued Lively and Reynolds for $400 million.vancityreynolds/InstagramLauren Sánchez subtly hits back at criticism over polarizing inauguration outfit
He also filed a lawsuit against the New York Times.GC Images

Legal Implications of Freedman’s Conduct

Lively and Reynolds’ legal team argue that Freedman’s behavior violates New York State’s Rules of Professional Conduct regarding trial publicity. They claim his actions are not only retaliatory but also risk tainting the jury pool in the event the case goes to trial.

“The statements contain numerous new false allegations about Ms. Lively and others,” the motion alleges, adding that Freedman’s actions are designed to shift public perception against Lively.

What’s Next in the Legal Battle?

As the court considers the gag order request, the legal battle between Lively, Baldoni, and their respective teams continues to intensify. Lively’s lawsuit and Baldoni’s countersuits have already drawn significant public attention, with each side accusing the other of professional and personal misconduct.

The case highlights the complexities of navigating high-profile legal disputes in the age of instant media coverage and public scrutiny.

Stay tuned for updates on this developing story.

subscribe the channel

Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %
Exit mobile version