PR specialist Jed Wallace is seeking to depose actress Blake Lively as part of an ongoing legal dispute stemming from the "It Ends With Us" film. Wallace, who was initially named in a 2024 administrative complaint filed by Lively, now wants Lively to answer questions under oath as he contests her attempt to recover $800,000 in legal fees from him.
Wallace is requesting that Lively testify about her state of mind when she made allegations against him. Specifically, he wants to know if she was aware her accusations were false, if she acted with reckless disregard for the truth, or if she had a good-faith belief in her statements. According to court documents, Wallace argues that Lively is the most suitable witness to testify about her subjective knowledge and intent concerning his alleged involvement.
Wallace initially sued Lively for defamation in Texas after being named in her administrative complaint but excluded from her subsequent federal complaint. A judge dismissed that case on jurisdictional grounds. Lively then sought to recoup her legal fees from Wallace.
Court documents indicate that Wallace's team scheduled Lively for a deposition on August 4, but her attorneys deemed the notice invalid. Lively's lawyers stated that Wallace had already taken the actress's deposition and that his case was dismissed, resulting in Lively's victory. They described Wallace's current filing as a "desperate, meritless attempt" to pursue Lively out of fear of a similar fee award he might face.
Wallace's lawsuit stemmed from Lively's initial complaint in December 2024, which described him as a Texas-based contractor who "weaponized a digital army" to promote social media content critical of her and supportive of co-star Justin Baldoni. This administrative complaint, described as a precursor to a lawsuit, was circulated to media outlets, leading to widespread reports incorrectly naming Wallace and his firm as defendants in Lively's subsequent federal complaint. Wallace claims this confusion resulted in him being wrongly accused of harassment and retaliation, causing him emotional distress and business losses. His own lawsuit, seeking damages exceeding $1 million, was also dismissed due to lack of personal jurisdiction. Miles Pollard, Wallace's attorney, stated that Wallace was never served in Lively's federal lawsuit and that the actress's team provided the precursor document to the media, which subsequently reported on the allegations against Wallace. Pollard further argued that Wallace's deposition is crucial because Lively's state of mind is central to the case, and she is the primary source for information regarding her intent and knowledge about her statements concerning Wallace and his company, Street Relations. Miles Pollard, Wallace's attorney, stated that Wallace was never served in Lively's federal lawsuit and that the actress's team provided the precursor document to the media, which subsequently reported on the allegations against Wallace. Pollard further argued that Wallace's deposition is crucial because Lively's state of mind is central to the case, and she is the primary source for information regarding her intent and knowledge about her statements concerning Wallace and his company, Street Relations.
Lively's lawyers countered that Wallace's claims were "meritless" and that she had already given a deposition. They suggested that Wallace's actions were an attempt to avoid potential fee awards similar to those Lively secured from Justin Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios in New York.