A choose has denied Justin Baldoni’s last-minute bid to depose Taylor Swift in an upcoming trial over Blake Full of life’s claims she was sexually harassed throughout the filming of It Ends With Us.
On Friday (September 12), U.S. District Decide Lewis Liman dominated that Baldoni and his co-defendants at Wayfarer Studios waited too lengthy to hunt Swift’s deposition and missed their probability.
The choose did, nevertheless, grant a 10-day extension for Full of life to take the depositions of Baldoni and two others. He stated the defendants have been too gradual in producing the requested paperwork, so Full of life and her legal professionals deserved the additional time to arrange. Within the case of Swift, the choose stated Baldoni and Wayfarer failed to indicate “good trigger” to justify the identical response.
“The one justification [Baldoni and the Wayfarer parties] have supplied for the extension is their assertion that Swift’s preexisting skilled obligations now stop her from showing for a deposition previous to October 20, 2025,” Decide Liman wrote. “Importantly, nevertheless, the Wayfarer events have supplied no dialogue of after they started trying to schedule the deposition. Discovery has been ongoing on this case for about six months.”
The choose famous that Baldoni beforehand requested Swift’s deposition in Might 2025 earlier than finally withdrawing that subpoena. “They’ve provided no proof that they’ve served a renewed subpoena on Swift. Thus, at most, the Wayfarer events have demonstrated that scheduling the deposition now presents logistical difficulties; that doesn’t reply the query of why the deposition couldn’t have been carried out earlier,” he wrote. “Having did not display applicable diligence, the requested extension is denied.”
It got here after Baldoni’s lawyer, Ellyn S. Garofalo, claimed in a letter to the court docket filed on Thursday (September 11) that Swift had “agreed” to seem for deposition however was unable to take action earlier than October 20. The letter requested an extension of the September 30 discovery deadline to accommodate Swift’s schedule.
On Friday (September 12), Swift’s lawyer refuted these claims. “As counsel for the events know, because the inception of this matter, we have now persistently maintained that my consumer has no materials position on this motion,” Swift’s lawyer J. Douglas Baldridge wrote in a letter to the choose filed in Manhattan federal court docket.
He added that Swift “didn’t comply with a deposition,” but when she was “pressured,” she had knowledgeable Baldoni’s camp that her schedule was too busy to accommodate it earlier than October 20.
Baldridge didn’t clarify what the scheduling battle was, however Swift is at the moment getting ready to launch her new album, ‘The Lifetime of a Showgirl’, on October 3. She additionally lately bought engaged to American footballer Travis Kelce.
The authorized battle between the 2 kicked off final December, when Full of life filed a sexual harassment and retaliation grievance with the California Civil Rights Division towards Baldoni. Within the submitting, she accused the director of “inappropriate and unwelcome behaviour” and claimed he was attempting to “destroy” her repute.
Baldoni has denied all accusations and countersued on January 16, together with Full of life’s husband Ryan Reynolds and publicist Leslie Sloane within the go well with. He tried to sue them for $400million (£295million) and claims that the actress tried to extort him. Within the aftermath of Full of life’s go well with, Baldoni was dropped by his expertise company William Morris Endeavor (WME) and in addition had a ladies’s solidarity award rescinded.
Swift grew to become concerned within the battle when Baldoni filed a duelling defamation lawsuit towards Full of life. It named Swift – who’s a buddy of Full of life’s – as a witness and alleged that the pop star was current for discussions between Full of life and Baldoni a couple of scene at the start of the movie.
It claimed that Full of life invited Baldoni to her New York Metropolis residence to speak over attainable script modifications, and Baldoni was left shocked to see that Swift and Full of life’s husband Ryan Reynolds have been there too. He alleges that Swift and Reynolds accepted of Full of life’s recommended model of the scene in query, pressuring him into accepting the revisions.
The unique submitting additionally made a nod to Swift and Reynolds, together with textual content messages the place Full of life seems to confer with the 2 as her “dragons”: “If you happen to ever get round to watching Recreation Of Thrones, you’ll respect that I’m Khaleesi, and like her, I occur to have a number of dragons. For higher of worse, however often higher. As a result of my dragons additionally shield these I battle for.”
In a separate response letter filed Friday, earlier than the choose’s ruling, certainly one of Full of life’s legal professionals blasted Baldoni’s camp for an “astounding” lack of respect for “Swift’s privateness and schedule.” The lawyer urged the court docket to disclaim Baldoni’s request for the late deposition.
“The Wayfarer defendants have repeatedly sought to carry Ms. Swift into this litigation to gas their relentless media technique. On this newest effort, the Wayfarer defendants assert – although, notably, with out proof – that Ms. Swift has supposedly ‘agreed’ to sit down for a deposition someday between October 20-25, some three weeks after the shut of truth discovery on this matter,” Full of life’s lawyer Michael J. Gottlieb wrote in his opposition.
“Ms. Swift is somebody whose calendar must be presumed to be filled with skilled obligations for months prematurely,” he continued. “At any level over the previous six months, the Wayfarer defendants might have observed a deposition, served a subpoena, and negotiated an agreeable time and place for this deposition. However they didn’t. As a substitute, the Wayfarer Defendants beforehand observed Ms. Swift’s deposition in Might 2025, accompanied by a barrage of press tales overlaying the identical, solely to withdraw that subpoena to a lot fanfare.”
Gottlieb claimed Baldoni and Wayfarer did “not even try to clarify their want for [Swift’s] deposition.” He additional accused them of attempting “to generate a media spectacle on this matter.”
In Might, Swift’s authorized workforce known as for the subpoena from Baldoni to be thrown out, outlining how neither the pop star nor her workforce had something to do with the problems raised within the lawsuit.
