Taylor Swift’s legal team told a federal judge that the singer will submit to a deposition in Blake Lively’s sexual-assault lawsuit against Justin Baldoni only if she is compelled to do so, and that she has ‘‘no material role’’ in the case.
In a Sept. 12 letter to U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman obtained by Fox News Digital, Swift’s attorney said the pop star ‘‘did not agree’’ to sit for questioning. The letter added that ‘‘if the singer is forced into a deposition,’’ she would make time during the week of Oct. 20, but that her team ‘‘consistently maintained that my client has no material role in this action’’ and that her counsel ‘‘take no role in those disputes.’'
The exchange follows a Sept. 11 filing from attorneys for Baldoni in which they said Swift had agreed to be deposed between Oct. 20 and Oct. 25, a claim first reported by Variety. The matter has become a contested point in ongoing discovery after Wayfarer Studios, the production company linked to the film adaptation of It Ends With Us, requested an extension of the discovery schedule to permit Swift’s deposition.
Lively’s lawyers pushed back in a separate filing directed at Wayfarer, saying the defendants had made the assertion ‘‘without evidence’’ and had failed to show ‘‘good cause’’ for the requested relief. Michael Gottlieb, an attorney for Lively, wrote that Wayfarer’s representation that Swift had ‘‘supposedly ‘agreed’ to sit for a deposition’’ came after the close of fact discovery and therefore did not justify altering the schedule.
The dispute arises in a civil lawsuit in which Lively alleges sexual assault by Baldoni. Both Lively and Baldoni appear in the film version of Colleen Hoover’s novel It Ends With Us; the production and related publicity have been part of the broader context in which the litigation is unfolding.
Representatives for Swift and for Baldoni did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. Court correspondence in the case shows the parties are contesting both the scope of permissible discovery and scheduling, and filings indicate the parties have been seeking the court’s direction on requests tied to witnesses and documentary material.
The back-and-forth over Swift’s potential testimony underscores the procedural disputes that can arise when third-party witnesses are connected to high-profile litigation. Swift’s lawyer reiterated in the Sept. 12 letter that the singer ‘‘did not agree’’ to sit for a deposition and that she has ‘‘no material role’’ in the action, while indicating a willingness to comply should the court require her to appear during the week of Oct. 20.
Court filings are public and the judge will decide whether to permit discovery to be extended or to compel testimony. The schedule, and any rulings about depositions, could affect remaining pretrial deadlines in the case.
As the litigation proceeds, filings and letters between counsel will likely continue to be the primary source of updates until the court issues formal orders or the parties reach any agreements about discovery. The litigation remains active in federal court, and any developments that alter the discovery timeline or require testimony from high-profile individuals are expected to be closely watched by both legal observers and the entertainment industry.