In a saga that already reads like a Hollywood courtroom drama, Blake Lively’s explosive $400 million lawsuit against It Ends With Us director Justin Baldoni has taken a curious and sensational new turn. The latest twist? A hotly contested subpoena at the heart of the storm — one that could either sink or save the case.
According to a report from Radar Online, the battle, laced with allegations of sexual harassment and reputation sabotage, now revolves around whether a key piece of legal documentation ever truly existed — and if it did, whether it had the authority it claimed.
A Phantom Subpoena?
Radar Online reported that , according to sources and court filings, the disputed document was allegedly sent to Baldoni’s former publicist, Stephanie Jones, instructing her to turn over private text messages involving Lively. Jones complied, handing over a treasure trove of sensitive communications that soon became critical evidence in Lively’s December lawsuit.
But Baldoni's attorney, Bryan Freedman, has come out swinging, insisting that the so-called subpoena was neither valid nor binding — and, crucially, may have been issued before any legal action was officially filed.
“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,” Freedman declared in a blistering statement. He also questioned whether any legal grounds existed at the time Jones acted, painting the situation as a vengeful betrayal.
Subpoena or Spite?
Jones, however, isn’t backing down — and neither is her legal team. Her attorney, Maaren Shah, fired back, saying Baldoni’s team is trying to “distract” from the core issue: the damning messages themselves.
“If Mr. Baldoni or his attorneys believe the subpoena… is fake, he should sign an affidavit saying so,” Shah challenged, adding that they eagerly await the discovery process.
The purported subpoena, dated October 1, 2024, reportedly originates from Manhattan Supreme Court but, curiously, lacks an official court stamp. The document is said to have been signed by a lawyer from Manatt, Phelps & Phillips — the firm representing Lively and her husband, actor Ryan Reynolds.
The paperwork demands all communications related to Lively, Reynolds, and their associated companies, and while The Daily Mail claims to have viewed the document, its legitimacy remains in limbo.
A Legal Ticking Clock
Legal experts weigh in with mixed opinions. Attorney Oleg Nekritin explains that while pre-litigation discovery is possible under certain scenarios — typically when preserving evidence at risk of destruction — using a subpoena to "go fishing" for a lawsuit isn’t legally sanctioned.
“In the Baldoni matter, any issues related to pretrial subpoenas will be moot,” Nekritin noted. “Now that a complaint has been filed, either side can legally subpoena witnesses and request documents.”
Still, questions linger. Was Jones acting under legal obligation or personal vendetta? And if the subpoena was premature — or even fabricated — could it invalidate a critical element of Lively’s case?
A Fractured Past
Once close collaborators, Baldoni and Jones ended their professional relationship on a bitter note amid the swelling controversy. Her firm, Jonesworks PR, had long represented Baldoni until the scandal fractured ties. Since then, Jennifer Abel and Melissa Nathan have taken over the director’s publicity operations.
The tension between legal maneuvering and personal history has created a messy, high-stakes courtroom confrontation, blurring the line between celebrity spectacle and serious legal precedent.
As the case barrels toward trial, the fate of one of Hollywood’s most talked-about legal battles may rest on whether that one elusive document — the “phantom subpoena” — stands up in court. What began as a shocking harassment allegation has now evolved into a high-drama thriller of its own, complete with questionable motives, strategic leaks, and legal chess moves.
In this cinematic clash of stars, agents, and attorneys, only one thing is certain: the final script has yet to be written.
According to a report from Radar Online, the battle, laced with allegations of sexual harassment and reputation sabotage, now revolves around whether a key piece of legal documentation ever truly existed — and if it did, whether it had the authority it claimed.
A Phantom Subpoena?
Radar Online reported that , according to sources and court filings, the disputed document was allegedly sent to Baldoni’s former publicist, Stephanie Jones, instructing her to turn over private text messages involving Lively. Jones complied, handing over a treasure trove of sensitive communications that soon became critical evidence in Lively’s December lawsuit.
But Baldoni's attorney, Bryan Freedman, has come out swinging, insisting that the so-called subpoena was neither valid nor binding — and, crucially, may have been issued before any legal action was officially filed.
“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,” Freedman declared in a blistering statement. He also questioned whether any legal grounds existed at the time Jones acted, painting the situation as a vengeful betrayal.
Subpoena or Spite?
Jones, however, isn’t backing down — and neither is her legal team. Her attorney, Maaren Shah, fired back, saying Baldoni’s team is trying to “distract” from the core issue: the damning messages themselves.
“If Mr. Baldoni or his attorneys believe the subpoena… is fake, he should sign an affidavit saying so,” Shah challenged, adding that they eagerly await the discovery process.
The purported subpoena, dated October 1, 2024, reportedly originates from Manhattan Supreme Court but, curiously, lacks an official court stamp. The document is said to have been signed by a lawyer from Manatt, Phelps & Phillips — the firm representing Lively and her husband, actor Ryan Reynolds.
The paperwork demands all communications related to Lively, Reynolds, and their associated companies, and while The Daily Mail claims to have viewed the document, its legitimacy remains in limbo.
A Legal Ticking Clock
Legal experts weigh in with mixed opinions. Attorney Oleg Nekritin explains that while pre-litigation discovery is possible under certain scenarios — typically when preserving evidence at risk of destruction — using a subpoena to "go fishing" for a lawsuit isn’t legally sanctioned.
“In the Baldoni matter, any issues related to pretrial subpoenas will be moot,” Nekritin noted. “Now that a complaint has been filed, either side can legally subpoena witnesses and request documents.”
Still, questions linger. Was Jones acting under legal obligation or personal vendetta? And if the subpoena was premature — or even fabricated — could it invalidate a critical element of Lively’s case?
A Fractured Past
Once close collaborators, Baldoni and Jones ended their professional relationship on a bitter note amid the swelling controversy. Her firm, Jonesworks PR, had long represented Baldoni until the scandal fractured ties. Since then, Jennifer Abel and Melissa Nathan have taken over the director’s publicity operations.
The tension between legal maneuvering and personal history has created a messy, high-stakes courtroom confrontation, blurring the line between celebrity spectacle and serious legal precedent.
As the case barrels toward trial, the fate of one of Hollywood’s most talked-about legal battles may rest on whether that one elusive document — the “phantom subpoena” — stands up in court. What began as a shocking harassment allegation has now evolved into a high-drama thriller of its own, complete with questionable motives, strategic leaks, and legal chess moves.
In this cinematic clash of stars, agents, and attorneys, only one thing is certain: the final script has yet to be written.
You may also like
BREAKING: Love Island's Sam Taylor's girlfriend, 22, suffers cardiac arrest and is rushed to hospital
Rory McIlroy to honour promise to PGA Tour rival after skipping £2.7m golf event
Who's in charge of the White House X account? Social media asks after it 'corrects' NYT headline
Joe Biden drops his ice cream and calls Ukraine Iraq in gaffe-filled Harvard trip
4 sheds, 3 crores, 2 nations, 1 dream: Story of India Aryabhata
