Blake Full of life seeks to have Justin Baldoni’s $400M defamation lawsuit dismissed – Nationwide
The It Ends With Us authorized battle continues as star Blake Full of life has requested a choose to dismiss a countersuit filed by her co-star Justin Baldoni, calling his claims “vengeful and rambling,” after she filed a lawsuit towards him for sexual harassment and retaliation.
On Thursday, Full of life’s attorneys wrote in papers filed in Manhattan federal court docket that Baldoni and his manufacturing firm’s claims they have been defamed have been a “profound abuse of the authorized course of.”
“The regulation prohibits weaponizing defamation lawsuits, like this one, to retaliate towards people who’ve filed authorized claims or have publicly spoken out about sexual harassment and retaliation,” the attorneys stated.
“The suitable to hunt authorized redress and the fitting of the press to report on it are sacred rules which might be protected by a number of privileges, together with the litigation and truthful report privileges, that are absolute,” they added.
Full of life’s authorized workforce additionally referred to Baldoni’s lawsuit as a part of a “sinister marketing campaign to bury and destroy” her for talking out about sexual harassment towards him.
Her attorneys invoked a California regulation that protects sexual harassment accusers, which Gov. Gavin Newsom signed, in response to defamation lawsuits introduced on in the course of the #MeToo motion. Full of life’s attorneys stated the regulation entitles her to say authorized charges and damages from Baldoni as soon as his go well with is thrown out.
“In different phrases, in an epic self-own, the Wayfarer Events have created extra legal responsibility for themselves by their malicious efforts to sue Ms. Full of life ‘into oblivion,’” the movement states.
Full of life sought unspecified damages when she sued Baldoni in late December for alleged sexual harassment and retaliation. He countersued for $400 million, accusing Full of life and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, of defamation and extortion.
In an announcement on Thursday, Full of life’s attorneys, Mike Gottlieb and Esra Hudson, stated Full of life “suffered tremendously” by talking up in regards to the alleged harassment.
“The painful actuality is that Ms. Full of life isn’t alone in being sued for defamation after talking up about being sexually harassed at work,” Full of life’s attorneys stated. “Whereas Ms. Full of life has suffered tremendously by talking up and pursuing authorized claims, it is vital for different individuals to know that they’ve protections and that there’s a particular regulation that expressly protects them from being silenced or financially ruined by a defamation lawsuit as a result of they’d the braveness to talk up.”
Baldoni’s attorneys have been fast to reply to Full of life’s try to dismiss his lawsuit towards her, referring to her actions as “abhorrent.”
Get every day Nationwide information
Get the day’s high information, political, financial, and present affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox as soon as a day.
“Ms. Full of life’s latest movement to dismiss herself from the self-concocted catastrophe she initiated is likely one of the most abhorrent examples of abusing our authorized system,” Baldoni’s lawyer, Bryan Freedman, stated in an announcement.
“Stringent guidelines are put into place to guard the harmless and permit people to rightfully defend themselves. Legal guidelines will not be meant to be twisted and curated by privileged elites to suit their very own private agenda,” Freedman added.
Freedman stated they’ll “proceed to carry Ms. Full of life accountable for her actions of pure malice, which embrace falsely accusing my shoppers of harassment and retaliation.”
“Her fantastical claims can be swiftly debunked as discovery strikes ahead, simply disproved with precise, evidentiary proof,” Freedman stated.
Full of life’s newest movement comes days after attorneys for Reynolds filed papers within the countersuit requesting to be dismissed from Baldoni’s $400 million civil extortion and defamation grievance.
Baldoni was dropped by his company, WME, which additionally represents Full of life. His go well with alleges that Reynolds was answerable for this after he approached a WME government on the Deadpool & Wolverine premiere and “expressed his deep disdain for Baldoni, suggesting the company was working with a ‘sexual predator.’”
“The whole thing of plaintiffs’ defamation declare seems to be based mostly on two occasions that Mr. Reynolds allegedly referred to as Mr. Baldoni a ‘predator,’” the submitting learn. (International Information has not independently reviewed the paperwork.)
“However, the FAC alleges no believable info that recommend Mr. Reynolds didn’t imagine this remark to be true; as a substitute, the related FAC allegations recommend that Mr. Reynolds genuinely, maybe passionately, believes that Mr. Baldoni’s conduct is reflective of a ‘predator,’” the submitting added.
Reynolds’ authorized workforce questioned the actor’s relevance to the go well with past his function as “a supportive partner who has witnessed firsthand the emotional, reputational and monetary devastation Ms. Full of life has suffered.”
Freedman responded to Reynolds’ submitting in an announcement offered to CNN. “After lighting a match, Mr. Reynolds now seeks to run from the flames. It gained’t work,” Freedman stated.
“Mr. Reynolds was a key participant within the scheme, defaming Justin round Hollywood, strong-arming WME into dropping Justin as a consumer, and making an attempt to destroy Justin’s profession nonetheless doable,” the assertion stated.
“His fingerprints have been throughout this smear marketing campaign towards Justin and the Wayfarer workforce since day one. Mr. Reynolds now makes an attempt to cut back plainly cognizable claims to ‘damage emotions,’ sending a transparent message that bullying is appropriate,” Freedman continued.
“Mr. Reynolds can seem on as many sketch reveals as he desires and feebly attempt to make gentle of his present scenario, however we won’t cease till he’s held accountable for his actions,” the assertion added, seemingly referencing Reynolds’ look on the fiftieth anniversary particular of Saturday Evening Stay in February.
Baldoni sued his co-star Full of life, 37, and Reynolds, 48, for defamation in January. That lawsuit got here the identical day that Baldoni sued the New York Occasions for libel, alleging the paper labored with Full of life to smear him.
For the reason that authorized battle started, Baldoni’s authorized workforce made textual content messages from Full of life and Reynolds public on a web site, titled The Lawsuit Information, created to assist defend himself.
On the web site, revealed in early February, Baldoni, 41, additionally shared an amended grievance in his case towards Full of life, Reynolds, Full of life’s PR agency and the New York Occasions, in addition to a 168-page doc referred to as, “Timeline of related occasions,” associated to the case and the manufacturing of the movie.
The timeline consists of emails and textual content messages that have been allegedly despatched main as much as and in the course of the film’s filming.
Full of life and Baldoni’s case headed to court docket on Feb. 3, because the Gossip Woman actor’s authorized workforce started to debate a possible gag order.
A U.S. choose reminded attorneys for Baldoni and Full of life to not publicly talk about the actors’ competing civil lawsuits.
At a listening to in Manhattan federal court docket, Gottlieb, Full of life’s lawyer, complained to Decide Lewis Liman that Freedman, Baldoni’s lawyer, violated skilled ethics guidelines for attorneys by accusing Full of life of “bullying.”
“It’s very onerous to un-ring the bell,” Gottlieb stated, arguing that such statements might taint the jury pool for the scheduled March 9, 2026 trial.
Freedman advised that his feedback to Individuals journal and in a podcast look have been a response to the Dec. 21, 2024 New York Occasions article that “fully devastated” Baldoni.
“This has not been a one-way road,” he stated.
Liman adopted a New York state rule barring most out-of-court statements that would have an effect on a case’s end result, besides for safeguarding a consumer from prejudicial hostile publicity.
The choose might sanction attorneys for violations. Neither Gottlieb nor Freedman objected.
— With information from The Related Press
