The It Ends With Us authorized battle continues — however this time it’s between star Blake Full of life and a Texas disaster communications specialist and his firm, Road Relations.
Jed Wallace and Road Relations are suing the actor for defamation after Full of life allegedly pulled them into her authorized struggle with co-star and director Justin Baldoni over the movie.
Wallace filed a $7-million lawsuit in federal courtroom in Texas on Tuesday, stating that he had nothing to do with any marketing campaign to hurt Full of life’s fame as she alleged in a courtroom submitting from December 2024. He’s additionally in search of a courtroom order stating that he didn’t interact in harassment or retaliation towards Full of life.
This got here after the Gossip Lady actor filed a petition on Jan. 21 in search of a deposition from Wallace, who Full of life alleges was utilized by publicists working with Baldoni to weaponize “a digital military across the nation, together with in New York and Los Angeles, to create, seed, manipulate, and advance disparaging content material that gave the impression to be genuine on social media platforms and web chat boards.” In response to The Hollywood Reporter, Full of life’s petition in search of a courtroom order to depose Wallace was dropped on Tuesday.
Wallace just isn’t among the many defendants in Full of life’s federal lawsuit towards Baldoni, his manufacturing firm and publicists, during which she alleges sexual and different harassment through the manufacturing and a marketing campaign to smear her after it. The disaster specialist is called within the courtroom papers and the New York Occasions story printed on the day the sequence of authorized battles started in December, when Full of life filed a grievance.
Wallace’s 10-page lawsuit says neither he nor Road Relations “had something to do with the alleged sexual harassment, retaliation, failure to analyze or aiding and abetting the alleged harassment or alleged retaliation,” in response to courtroom paperwork. (International Information has not independently considered the paperwork.)
“The statements of reality, precise or implied, of and regarding Plaintiffs within the Precursor and CRD Criticism are false, defamatory, made with both negligence or ‘precise malice’ and have induced hundreds of thousands of {dollars} in reputational hurt together with each basic and particular damages by emotional hurt (Wallace), precise damages and actual and projected lack of enterprise (Wallace and Road) in an quantity that exceeds $1,000,000,” Wallace’s submitting learn.
“As Full of life later admitted she knew of no info to assist the allegations,” Charles Babcock, a lawyer for Wallace, wrote within the grievance. “Neither Wallace nor Road had something to do with the alleged sexual harassment, retaliation, failure to analyze or aiding and abetting the alleged harassment or alleged retaliation. Neither may they’ve breached a contract with Full of life as a result of no such contract exists.”
Get each day Nationwide information
Get the day’s high information, political, financial, and present affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox as soon as a day.
In response to the lawsuit, Full of life’s authorized staff stated, “One other day, one other state, one other nine-figure lawsuit in search of to sue Ms. Full of life ‘into oblivion’ for talking out towards sexual harassment and retaliation.”
“This isn’t only a publicity stunt — it’s clear retaliation in response to allegations contained inside a sexual harassment and retaliation grievance that Ms. Full of life filed with the California Civil Rights Division,” her attorneys added of their assertion to media. “Whereas this lawsuit shall be dismissed, we’re happy that Mr. Wallace has lastly emerged from the shadows, and that he too shall be held accountable in federal courtroom.”
Wallace’s lawyer Babcock launched an announcement in response to Full of life’s authorized staff. He referred to Wallace as “a really non-public particular person, who has by no means met or spoken to Ms. Full of life. Ever.”
“He has not engaged in a smear marketing campaign towards her at any cut-off date. The choice to file this lawsuit to rightfully defend himself and his household was made after Ms. Full of life not solely filed towards him first in Texas however, indicated she meant to call him in yet one more lawsuit,” Babcock stated.
The continuing authorized battle between the It Ends With Us co-stars started after Full of life sued Baldoni and he filed his personal federal lawsuit towards her and her husband, Deadpool star Ryan Reynolds, accusing them of defamation and extortion and in search of at the least $400 million in damages.
Trending Now
Trump’s plan for ‘hemispheric management’: Steve Bannon on why tariffs could solely be the beginning
Driver charged in Gaudreau deaths says brothers have been extra impaired than him
Extra on Leisure
Extra movies
Baldoni had already sued the New York Occasions for libel, and his former publicist filed a lawsuit taking Full of life’s aspect.
Full of life and Baldoni’s case headed to courtroom on Feb. 3 as Full of life’s authorized staff started to debate a possible gag order.
On Feb. 3, a U.S. decide admonished attorneys for Baldoni and Full of life to not publicly talk about the actors’ competing civil lawsuits. Full of life’s lawyer Michael Gottlieb complained to U.S. District Decide Lewis Liman at a listening to in Manhattan federal courtroom that Baldoni’s lawyer Bryan Freedman violated skilled ethics guidelines for attorneys by accusing Full of life of “bullying.”
“It’s very arduous to un-ring the bell,” Gottlieb stated, arguing that such statements may taint the jury pool for the scheduled March 9, 2026 trial.
Baldoni’s lawyer Bryan Freedman instructed that his feedback to Individuals and in a podcast look have been a response to the Dec. 21 New York Occasions article that “utterly devastated” Baldoni.
“This has not been a one-way avenue,” he stated.
Liman adopted a New York state rule barring most out-of-court statements that might have an effect on a case’s end result, with an exception for shielding a shopper from prejudicial adversarial publicity.
The decide may sanction attorneys for violations. Neither Gottlieb nor Freedman objected. Baldoni and Full of life weren’t in attendance on the listening to.
Full of life’s attorneys Gottlieb and Esra Hudson stated in an announcement, “We’re happy with the results of as we speak’s listening to and keen to maneuver ahead instantly with discovery on this case.”
“The courtroom granted our request that every one attorneys within the matter truly observe the rule of regulation and never make any statements that might prejudice a jury,” they continued. “This case offers with critical allegations of sexual harassment and retaliation. We’ll maintain the defendants accountable, and we’re assured that after all of the proof is submitted on this matter, Ms. Full of life will prevail.”
Freedman stated, “I couldn’t be extra happy with how the case was dealt with as we speak. We’re going to maneuver as rapidly as attainable and show our innocence.”
It Ends With Us, an adaptation of Colleen Hoover’s bestselling 2016 novel that begins as a romance however takes a darkish flip into home violence, was launched in August 2024, exceeding field workplace expectations with a home whole of practically $150 million. The success was adopted by near-constant turmoil over its manufacturing and promotion.
—With recordsdata from The Related Press
Curator Suggestions
6 greatest scalp & hair remedies for final dryness reduction
10 fabulous finds for the month of February
© 2025 International Information, a division of Corus Leisure Inc.
