A decide 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 through the filming of It Ends With Us.
On Friday (September 12), U.S. District Choose Lewis Liman dominated that Baldoni and his co-defendants at Wayfarer Studios waited too lengthy to hunt Swift’s deposition and missed their likelihood.
The decide 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 sluggish in producing the requested paperwork, so Full of life and her attorneys deserved the additional time to organize. Within the case of Swift, the decide stated Baldoni and Wayfarer failed to point out “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,” Choose Liman wrote. “Importantly, nevertheless, the Wayfarer events have supplied no dialogue of after they started making an attempt to schedule the deposition. Discovery has been ongoing on this case for about six months.”
The decide 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 didn’t reveal applicable diligence, the requested extension is denied.”
It got here after Baldoni’s lawyer, Ellyn S. Garofalo, claimed in a letter to the courtroom filed on Thursday (September 11) that Swift had “agreed” to look 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, for the reason that inception of this matter, we’ve constantly maintained that my consumer has no materials position on this motion,” Swift’s lawyer J. Douglas Baldridge wrote in a letter to the decide filed in Manhattan federal courtroom.
He added that Swift “didn’t conform to a deposition,” but when she was “compelled,” 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 making ready to launch her new album, ‘The Lifetime of a Showgirl’, on October 3. She additionally just lately acquired 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 criticism with the California Civil Rights Division towards Baldoni. Within the submitting, she accused the director of “inappropriate and unwelcome behaviour” and claimed he was making an attempt to “destroy” her popularity.
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 likewise had a girls’s solidarity award rescinded.
Swift turned concerned within the battle when Baldoni filed a duelling defamation lawsuit towards Full of life. It named Swift – who’s a pal 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 few 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 adjustments, and Baldoni was left stunned to see that Swift and Full of life’s husband Ryan Reynolds have been there too. He alleges that Swift and Reynolds authorised of Full of life’s urged 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 seek advice from the 2 as her “dragons”: “For those who ever get round to watching Sport Of Thrones, you’ll recognize that I’m Khaleesi, and like her, I occur to have a number of dragons. For higher of worse, however normally higher. As a result of my dragons additionally defend these I battle for.”
In a separate response letter filed Friday, earlier than the decide’s ruling, one in every of Full of life’s attorneys blasted Baldoni’s camp for an “astounding” lack of respect for “Swift’s privateness and schedule.” The lawyer urged the courtroom to disclaim Baldoni’s request for the late deposition.
“The Wayfarer defendants have repeatedly sought to deliver 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 take a seat for a deposition someday between October 20-25, some three weeks after the shut of reality discovery on this matter,” Full of life’s lawyer Michael J. Gottlieb wrote in his opposition.
“Ms. Swift is somebody whose calendar ought to be presumed to be filled with skilled obligations for months prematurely,” he continued. “At any level over the previous six months, the Wayfarer defendants may have observed a deposition, served a subpoena, and negotiated an agreeable time and place for this deposition. However they didn’t. As an alternative, 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 making an attempt “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.
