Revealed: The Latest Twist in Blake Lively's Nasty $400Million Legal Battle That Could Destroy Her 'Harassment' Case
Blake Lively's legal battle with her It Ends With Us co-star Justin Baldoni has taken a fresh twist which could impact her harassment case.
April 15 2025, Published 11:29 a.m. ET
Blake Lively's legal war against It Ends With Us director Justin Baldoni has taken a fresh twist over the authenticity of a subpoena.
RadarOnline.com can reveal the document was allegedly sent to Baldoni's former PR Stephanie Jones and instructed her to hand over sensitive text messages to Lively – which she did.
Baldoni claimed Lively and her husband organized a smear campaign to ruin his reputation.
However, his attorneys have cast doubt on whether the document was valid since it was supposedly sent out before any legal moves had been taken by either side.
Baldoni's attorney, Bryan Freedman, claims Jones only passed on the messages out of "spite."
In a statement, Freedman said: "There is no doubt that Stephanie Jones willingly and maliciously spread private and confidential communications concerning her former clients in an effort to humiliate them and destroy the fledgling business and reputation of her former employee.
"She did so purely out of spite and prior to any phantom subpoena that we have yet to see."
Lively and Reynolds were accused by Baldoni of sabotaging his movie, It Ends With Us.
According to Freedman, a subpoena requires a case number from a filed legal case to be referenced and no case was ever filed against Jones or anyone prior to her giving Lively those text messages.
But Jones's lawyer, Maaren Shah, hit back, saying: "More distractions, and still no defense for what the whole world saw in those text messages.
"If Mr Baldoni or his attorneys believe the subpoena legally requiring Ms Jones to turn over the damning evidence demonstrating his client orchestrated a smear campaign against Ms Lively is fake, he should sign an affidavit saying so, and we look forward to the discovery process."
Baldoni, 41, and Lively, 37, have been at war for months over her claims he sexually harassed her on the set – which formed the basis of a major New York Times article – and his accusations that she didn't take the movie's domestic abuse focus seriously while promoting the film.
Jones's company Jonesworks PR represented Baldoni, but the two parted ways in a bitter split after the controversy began. A former employee, Jennifer Abel, and consultant, Melissa Nathan, then took over the job.
In new court documents, Jones said she was complying with the subpoena when she turned over sensitive messages to Lively that ended up being central to the actress's blockbuster lawsuit against her co-star in December.
Baldoni also claims Lively did not take the movie's domestic abuse focus seriously while promoting the film.
But Freedman said he has not seen the document and questioned whether it was ever filed, while noting inconsistencies in the timeline.
The Daily Mail claims to have reviewed a copy of the purported subpoena, dated October 1, 2024. It says it was filed in Manhattan Supreme Court but it has no court stamp on it.
It is signed by an attorney working for the New York law firm of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, who represent Lively and her husband, actor Ryan Reynolds, 48.
It orders Jones to hand over all documents and communications concerning Lively and Reynolds and their companies.
Never Miss an
Daily updates from the heart of Hollywood, right to your inbox
By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you’re agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Lively is battling to save her reputation after Baldoni hit her and husband Ryan Reynolds with lawsuit.
Attorney and legal expert Oleg Nekritin explained a pre-lawsuit discovery can happen but only under certain circumstances, such as preserving evidence that is at risk of being lost or destroyed.
However, Nekritin noted that a subpoena cannot be used to dig for evidence of a possible cause of action, or what's commonly referred to as a "fishing expedition."
"In the Baldoni matter, any issues related to pretrial subpoenas will be moot, as a complaint was eventually filed, allowing either side to have the opportunity to subpoena witnesses and to obtain documents," the attorney explained.
"If a party filed a pretrial subpoena that was not complied with, their recourse will be to file a new subpoena under the active docket number."
