An attorney who represented Johnny Depp in his drawn out battle against Amber Heard has revealed he is ‘blown away’ by the ‘aggressive’ approach Justin Baldoni has taken against Blake Lively.
The It Ends With Us director’s legal team launched a website purporting to show a timeline of events in the messy saga and an amended legal complaint.
The battle between Hollywood heavyweights Blake and Ryan Reynolds and Baldoni has played out in the press and on social media, prompting a stern response from a judge in Manhattan Federal Court on Monday.
‘If it turns out that this ends up being litigated in the press in a way that would prejudice the opportunity of a fair trial… one of the tools the court has is to accelerate the date of the trial,’ Judge Lewis Liman warned on Monday.
Moving forward the trial date, which is tentatively set for March 2026, would give both parties less time for discovery and building their cases.
‘That’s something that is out there,’ he said. ‘I don’t want to do that.’
Attorney Benjamin Chew, who represented Depp in his defamation case against Heard, told Law&Crime he found Baldoni’s team’s ‘aggressive’ approach ‘very impressive.’
‘Usually, you would not do something like that before a hearing… It’s a novel approach, a bold approach,’ he said.
The battle between Hollywood heavyweights Blake and Ryan Reynolds and Baldoni has played out in the press and on social media
Attorney Benjamin Chew, who represented Depp (pictured together) in his defamation case against Heard, told Law& Crime he found Baldoni’s team’s ‘aggressive’ approach ‘very impressive’
The website (pictured above) contain legal documents that share his side of the story
Baldoni’s team shared a website containing his amended complaint and a timeline of relevant events related to the case.
Chew said Baldoni’s team, led by bulldog showbiz lawyer Bryan Freedman – whose previous clients include Megyn Kelly and Tucker Carlson – appear to be walking a fine line, but have no doubt ‘vetted it carefully’ before launching the website.
‘Posting a pleading doesn’t seem to me to be out of bounds. These are pleadings made in the public records,’ he said.
‘Whenever you’re getting into work product or advocacy pieces, then I think it’s getting closer to the line.’
But Freedman and his co-counsel will argue that the two uploaded documents were merely published court filings already available to the public via the federal government’s Pacer website.
‘It’s important to point out that nobody is monetizing off this. It’s simply a landing page to have access to legal documents that are already public,’ a source told DailyMail.com.
‘This is far from a provocation. In fact, it’s yet more evidence that Justin and his team intend to be continually transparent.’
Chew said the biggest challenge for both sides would ultimately be convincing a jury to care about their client.
Baldoni’s team shared a website containing his amended complaint and a timeline of relevant events related to the case
Chew said Baldoni’s team appear to be walking a fine line, but have no doubt ‘vetted it carefully’ before launching the website
Chew said the biggest challenge and difference to the Depp v Heard case for both sides would ultimately be convincing a jury to care about their client
‘A challenge that we had, and I think the other side had – but they really have it in this case – is to convince a jury of lay people why they should care about a dispute between two very powerful, successful, attractive actors,’ he said.
Lively accused Baldoni of sexual harassment and launching a smear campaign against her in a bombshell lawsuit last year.
At the same time, the New York Times released a story based on her legal filing that accused him of orchestrating the smear campaign.
In response, Baldoni hit back by suing the New York Times for defamation before launching a $400 million lawsuit against Lively and Reynolds in which he accused the Hollywood pairing of conspiring to trash his reputation.
He also accused Lively of hijacking the filming of the movie and claimed she forced him and his family to wait in a basement holding area at the premiere so she did not have to see him.
Both parties and the New York Times have denied the claims levelled against them.
Judge Liman told lawyers for both sides: ‘My expectation is the parties will comply with their ethical obligations.
‘I don’t expect this case to devolve into satellite litigation over the comments of a lawyer. Both have said a lot in the pleadings that give the public plenty to feast upon’.
