Blake Lively is facing yet another legal hurdle as PR consultant Jed Wallace files a new request to depose her in connection with the $800,000 in attorney fees she was awarded following her high-profile legal battle with Justin Baldoni. According to court documents reported by TMZ, Wallace has asked a Texas judge to compel Lively to answer questions under oath, arguing that her sexual harassment allegations involving him and his company were made with malice. The request marks the latest twist in a sprawling legal saga that has captured Hollywood's attention.

New Deposition Request

The legal fight between Lively and her former co-star Justin Baldoni continues to spawn collateral disputes. This time, Jed Wallace, the PR consultant who worked closely with Baldoni during his legal confrontation with Lively, has filed a new case in Texas. In his filing, Wallace is seeking to force Lively to sit for a deposition regarding the $800,000 in attorney fees she requested and subsequently won. Wallace argues that he has a right to question her because the issue of malice is directly relevant to whether he should be responsible for her legal bills. He also claims that Lively failed to follow the legal process and was a no-show to her deposition.

Wallace's legal maneuver appears to be aimed at challenging the fee award that a judge granted Lively last month. Despite the court ordering Wallace to pay Lively's legal fees, there are obstacles before the money is transferred. The new deposition request could further delay the payment and add another layer of complexity to an already convoluted legal situation.

Lively's Legal Team Responds

Lively's legal representatives have strongly rejected Wallace's arguments. In an official statement, they characterized the deposition request as baseless and noted that Wallace has already taken Lively's deposition in a previous round of litigation. The statement read: "Jed Wallace already took Ms. Lively's deposition. His case was dismissed. Ms. Lively won. This is yet another desperate, meritless attempt by Wallace to go after Ms. Lively out of fear that he may face the same kind of fee award that Ms. Lively won from Justin Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios in New York."

This is not the first time Wallace has attempted to pursue legal action against Lively. Earlier, he filed a defamation lawsuit against her in Texas, but the court found that it lacked jurisdiction over the actress. That case was dismissed, a decision that Wallace has now appealed. The latest deposition request seems to be part of a broader strategy to keep the legal pressure on Lively, even as her primary case against Baldoni has been resolved.

Background of the Legal Battle

The dispute between Lively and Baldoni began during the promotional tour for their film "It Ends with Us" in 2024. Lively accused Baldoni of sexual harassment and of orchestrating a smear campaign against her to damage her reputation. She filed a lawsuit in New York, naming Baldoni, Wayfarer Studios, and Jed Wallace as defendants. The suit alleged that Wallace contributed to the alleged smear campaign by engaging in coordinated PR tactics designed to tarnish Lively's public image.

Baldoni denied all allegations and countersued, creating a legal battle that dominated tabloids for months. The case was scheduled for a preliminary hearing, but in early 2025, Lively and Baldoni reached a settlement just before the hearing was set to take place. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed, but it effectively ended their direct legal conflict. However, the matter of attorney fees remained unresolved, with Lively seeking $800,000 from Wallace to cover her legal expenses.

Attorney Fees and the Court's Ruling

In a ruling last month, a federal judge granted Lively's request for the clearance of her attorney fees, ordering Wallace to pay the $800,000. However, the judge denied Lively's request for punitive damages. Wallace's legal team has since argued that the fee award was inappropriate because Lively's allegations against him lacked merit and were made with malice. The new deposition request is designed to gather evidence that could support that argument.

Legal experts suggest that Wallace's request may be an uphill battle. In order to succeed, he would need to demonstrate that Lively's allegations were not only false but also made with actual malice. This standard requires proof that Lively knew the allegations were false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. Given that Lively's claims against Baldoni were settled and her legal team asserts that she has already provided deposition testimony, Wallace's task appears daunting.

Jurisdictional Issues Continue

A central theme in the ongoing legal disputes is the issue of jurisdiction. Lively's original claims against Wallace in New York were dismissed because the court determined that it did not have jurisdiction over Wallace, who operates from Texas. Similarly, Wallace's defamation suit against Lively in Texas was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds, though he has appealed that decision. The jurisdictional ping-pong has created a procedural maze that both sides are navigating.

The new deposition request in Texas could be seen as an attempt by Wallace to use his home-state courts to gain a tactical advantage. By forcing Lively to travel to Texas for a deposition, Wallace may hope to apply additional pressure, both legally and personally. However, Lively's lawyers have made it clear that they will fight the request, arguing that Wallace has already had his chance to question her and that his case was dismissed.

Implications for the Broader Legal Landscape

The case has broader implications for how attorney fees are awarded in high-profile defamation and harassment cases. When a court orders one party to pay the other's legal fees, it is typically meant to serve as a sanction or a deterrent. Wallace's efforts to challenge the fee award could test the limits of post-judgment discovery and deposition procedures.

Furthermore, the saga highlights the increasingly prominent role of PR consultants in celebrity legal battles. Allegations of smear campaigns have become a recurring theme in Hollywood disputes, with publicists and crisis managers often finding themselves in the crosshairs of litigation. Jed Wallace's involvement in the Lively-Baldoni case has made him a key figure in these discussions, and his legal battles with Lively may set a precedent for how PR professionals are held accountable for their tactics.

What Happens Next?

As the legal proceedings continue, all eyes will be on the Texas judge's decision regarding the deposition request. If the judge sides with Wallace, Lively may be compelled to sit for another deposition, which could prolong the discovery process. If the judge denies the request, Wallace will have exhausted another avenue in his attempt to avoid paying the attorney fees.

For Lively, the focus remains on moving forward, both professionally and personally. She has continued to work on various projects and has received support from fans and colleagues amid the legal turmoil. However, this latest development serves as a reminder that even after a settlement, the legal fallout can persist.

In the meantime, Wallace's appeal of the dismissed defamation case is still pending, adding another layer of uncertainty. Should that appeal succeed, Lively could face yet another defamation lawsuit in Texas. But for now, the immediate question is whether she will be forced to testify again.

Legal analysts note that the fee award was a significant victory for Lively, but the collection process is proving to be anything but straightforward. The case demonstrates that winning a fee award is only half the battle; enforcing it can be a cumbersome process, especially when the losing party is determined to resist.

As the legal saga drags on, the entertainment industry and legal community alike will be watching closely. The outcome of these proceedings could influence how future disputes between celebrities and PR consultants are litigated, particularly when it comes to attorney fees and deposition requirements.

Blake Lively's legal team remains confident that the deposition request will be denied. They emphasize that Wallace's arguments are meritless and that the fee award stands. However, in the unpredictable world of litigation, nothing is certain until a judge issues a final ruling.

For now, the ball is in the Texas judge's court, and both parties await the next chapter in this high-stakes legal battle.

Source: MSN News