Entertainment Weekly reports Jenna Dewan was in for a surprise when she looked over in the Dancing With The Stars ballroom and spotted justin baldoni and his family. And Julianne Hough invited Justin Baldoni to watch DWTS.

Ryan Reynolds was very involved in pressuring Sony to side with Blake Lively publicly. His reaction to the backlash over marketing makes me think he took it very, VERY personal. Almost like he had designed it all himself. Also, I got my account access back about 5 minutes ago.

That 30-point list disappeared. If it resurfaced as it was read on the 4th, I wonder if it would be reflective of this bills penalties. Were they putting down what would net them not only security, but money and punishment off that bill?

Anyway, three weeks later Nicepool appeared.

Reading that message, it honestly sounds like Colleen Hoover is hitting on her. WTF?

She also posted another video and says Colleen gave her $2000 dollars 🤔

I don’t want to throw around labels, but Jesus, Colleen is giving me the creeps.

This space is designed to discuss all things relevant to the cases (even minor!) and those involved. Please feel free to share all types of questions, or share thoughtful opinions and theories.

The cases are complex and it can be difficult to both keep up with, and remember all the facts and details. New members or those seeking clarification are welcome to post here too.

If you have concerns about sub rules and/or sub moderation, please reach out via modmail.

This thread is designed to promote healthy and productive discussions and avoid low-effort or off-topic posts. Please keep things civil and respectful for the health of the community at large. 💙

Below a list of some personal takeaways followed by content creators videos on YouTube who read and/or commented on the motions for summary judgment that were filed in the Jones v. Abel case on October the 15th.

SOME TAKEAWAYS from Wayfarer parties MSJ :

👉 Quote from the intro : "A publicist’s most basic duty is to protect her client and make the client look good. A written agreement reinforced that duty, obligating Jonesworks to provide its services in a professional manner, consistent with its client’s goals. Instead, in August 2024, every step Jones took appeared designed to bring about Wayfarer’s downfall.

As Wayfarer worked to contain a brewing public relations nightmare over a dispute between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni on the set of Wayfarer’s film It Ends With Us, Jones tossed a grenade into those efforts. Rather than heed Wayfarer’s explicit instructions not to communicate with anyone about the Lively-Baldoni rift, Jones contacted the Daily Mail to pour fuel on the simmering fire. Jones also contacted Lively’s publicist Leslie Sloane, who had agreed to a truce in which each party would refrain from public comments, destroying the truce and opening the floodgates to a full-on public relations war. Jones then pulled the rug out from under Wayfarer by firing its day-to-day point of contact, taking the contents of that employee’s phone to Sloane, and going silent, offering no communication or representation strategy for over a week while Wayfarer dealt with the fallout. Unable to control its rogue publicist, who was actively flouting Wayfarer’s instructions and undermining its stated goal of chilling the furor, Wayfarer was left no choice but to terminate Jonesworks for materially breaching the Wayfarer Agreement."

👉 Jen Abel seems to have done everything right while leaving Stephaine Jones company Jones works : clients were informed she was leaving AFTER Stephanie was inforned and she DID NOT ASK any of the Jonesworks clients to follow her at her new company. Interesting for me to learn she decided to leave Joneswork due to the working environment that was becoming toxic and resigned on the day she witnessed Jones bullying a colleague in a meeting. She resigned on July 10th, 2024 and gave a six week transition notice. I was not aware that Jen was on that transition period during the PR crisis Wayfarer was going through in July and August. Stephanie terminated her 2 days prior to the previously agreed departure date ( the day she ambushed her with lawyer and security and took her phone and laptop).

👉 Jones told Abel in writing that she could take Clients - including Wayfarer : "Plaintiffs gave Abel consent to take Wayfarer as a client and thus waived their right to seek damages for Wayfarer leaving Jonesworks.(...) And, as shown above, Wayfarer terminated Jonesworks on August 30, 2024 because of Jones’ own conduct. (...)Wayfarer would not have renewed its agreement with Jonesworks because of Jones’ conduct, not Abel's."

👉 "Lively caused Vanzan, a shell entity she controlled, to file that complaint, which had no purpose but to facilitate Jones’ transfer of the messages to Lively under the protection of the litigation privilege. R.56.1 ¶ 115. Those cherry-picked texts later featured in a New York Times story. They ultimately proved nothing in Lively v. Wayfarer, but they harmed Wayfarer simply by being shared—exactly the result a publicist is retained to prevent. This Court has already observed that “[t]here is no question that the actions Jonesworks is accused of having taken would have been viewed as defeating the object of the services to be provided if they were taken at the incipiency of the relationship. Taken as true, they are not less destructive of the object of the relationship because they were taken in its twilight.” Dkt. No. 233 at 22. S"

👉 The Melissa Nathan website stories appear as a nothingburger in this case, as the defamation claim against does for the website has already been dismissed by the judge.

👉 Ashley Avignone seems to have been deposed on the vanzan related stuff? Waiting for more infos as there are still a lot of redactions 👀

CONTENT CREATORS COVERING THIS:

Kenz : Motion for Summary Jugement's MAJOR reveal

🌼 This is a good TLDR

Mandy Magnan : link here

🌹Mandy is a exceptionnal reader, and very serious commenter with some spice

Live with Elsrich, Docketupdates.com and BocceGoHawks : Link here

🏵️ These ladies are smart AND funny

Lauren / the court of random opinion : Reading both motions, from wayfarer and Stephanie Jones

🌻Lauren gave a shout out to the Redditor here who posted the MSJs !

💮 Of course, there is the fantastic not actually golden aka NAG comments, already posted here

This video was published January 2025, before discovery had even begun to reveal the private communications that would later become public.

That’s what makes this clip worth revisiting for me because Candace wasn’t reacting to leaked emails or connecting dots after the fact.
She was making that prediction before the public had access to the evidence that would later fuel scrutiny of Ryan’s role in the controversy.

And as more information emerged, Ryan’s involvement became a much bigger part of the conversation than many people might have anticipated at the beginning. His private communications, his comments about Justin Baldoni, and his involvement in the conflict raised questions about the extent of his influence and whether he was simply supporting his wife or helping shape the broader narrative.

**I will forever mourn that we never got an episode after the great unsealing. I would have loved her reaction reading all of his unhinged texts.

📍Jones v Abel: Wayfarer files Motion for Summary Judgement against Jones/Jonesworks u/same-difference-ave

🔥🔥🔥 NotactuallyGolden - MOTION for Summary Judgment to Dismiss Stephanie Jones’s Remaining Claims (Part 1)

🔥🔥🔥 NotactuallyGolden - MOTION for Summary Judgment to Dismiss Stephanie Jones’s Remaining Claims (Part 2): The Evidence May Not Support Stephanie Jones’s Theory and Examines Jennifer Abel’s Strongest Summary Judgment Arguments

👩‍❤️‍💋‍👩👸🏻🙆🏻‍♀️ NotactuallyGolden - Jameela Jamil’s Declaration Backs Jennifer Abel and Wayfarer’s Version of Events in Support of MOTION for Summary Judgment to Dismiss Stephanie Jones’s Remaining Claims (Part 3)

📄 Why Jameela Jamil’s declaration matters | 0:00–0:45

• NAG examines Jameela Jamil’s declaration supporting Jennifer Abel’s motion for summary judgment.
• NAG considers it one of the most revealing documents in the filings.
• Although Jameela is a secondary witness, NAG says her account supports the version of events Abel has presented throughout the case.
• To NAG, the declaration reads almost like an opening statement explaining Abel’s entire defence.

⚖️ NAG acknowledges her personal bias | 0:45–1:23

• NAG says she has followed Jameela’s work for years and respects her advocacy concerning body image, diet culture and the treatment of women.
• Because of that respect, she is inclined to find Jameela credible.
• NAG openly acknowledges this possible bias.

🤝 Jameela’s professional relationship with Jennifer Abel | 1:23–2:22

• Jameela and Abel were friends who had previously worked together through the PR agency.
• When Abel moved to Jonesworks, Jameela was initially unsure whether she wanted to follow her.
• Abel strongly promoted Stephanie Jones and Jonesworks, describing Jones positively and encouraging Jameela to move both her personal and company PR work there.
• Jonesworks reportedly charged approximately twice what Jameela had previously paid.
• Stephanie Jones and her team allegedly made numerous promises while courting Jameela as a client.
• According to Jameela, those promised services never materialised after she joined.

📉 Allegations of poor service at Jonesworks | 2:22–3:38

• Jameela says she felt neglected after joining Jonesworks and received meaningful attention mainly from Abel and Abel’s team.
• NAG connects this account to Abel’s description of conditions inside Jonesworks during the summer of 2024.
• Stephanie Jones has portrayed a Business Insider article about her as a coordinated attack involving Abel, Melissa Nathan and unhappy former employees.
• Abel and others have instead alleged that Jones was neglecting clients, behaving erratically and losing major accounts.
• NAG says Jameela’s experience supports that broader account.
• She mentions Tom Brady and The Rock among the prominent clients who were allegedly leaving during that period.
• Jameela reportedly accepted that she was less famous than some Jonesworks clients but remained frustrated because she was paying substantial fees for inadequate service.

🛡️ Abel allegedly encouraged Jameela to remain | 3:38–4:20

• Jameela says she repeatedly complained to Abel about the cost and quality of the agency’s work.
• Abel secured a reduced rate for her but continued encouraging her to remain with Jonesworks.
• NAG argues that this conduct contradicts the claim that Abel was acting disloyally or preparing to steal clients.
• Instead of telling Jameela to wait for her new company, Abel allegedly tried to repair Jameela’s relationship with Jonesworks.
• NAG acknowledges that retaining Jameela also benefited Abel financially, but says the evidence still shows Abel promoting Jonesworks rather than undermining it.

🚪 How Abel disclosed her departure | 4:20–5:15

• After deciding to leave, Abel allegedly told Jameela only after agreeing with Stephanie Jones about the timing and terms of her departure.
• NAG says this supports Abel’s claim that she did not secretly warn or recruit clients beforehand.
• According to Jameela’s declaration, Abel described her decision positively and did not disparage Jones.
• Jameela says she personally asked to continue working with Abel because Abel was the reason she had joined Jonesworks.
• She emphasises that Abel did not ask her to follow.

📞 Stephanie Jones’s sudden outreach | 5:15–6:08

• Jameela says Stephanie Jones began contacting her around the time of Abel’s departure, despite having barely communicated with her previously.
• Jones allegedly told Jameela that she missed her, which Jameela found confusing because they had spent so little time together.
• NAG compares this with Wayfarer’s account of what happened when it decided to follow Abel.
• Wayfarer alleges that Jones suddenly emphasised their closeness after learning the company intended to leave.
• NAG believes the similarity between Jameela’s experience and Wayfarer’s account strengthens Wayfarer’s version of events.

🤐 Abel allegedly avoided criticising Stephanie Jones | 6:08–6:51

• Jameela says Abel never disclosed the personal conflict with Jones or criticised Jones while Jameela was still a client.
• Abel allegedly offered to arrange another Jonesworks representative if Jameela wished to remain with the company.
• Jameela says she was initially angry that Abel had kept the internal problems from her while she continued paying high fees and complaining about the service.
• Even under those circumstances, Abel allegedly did not disparage Jones or encourage Jameela to leave.
• Jameela ultimately chose to continue working with Abel.

✅ How the declaration supports Abel and Wayfarer | 6:51–7:27

• Jameela describes Abel as exceptionally loyal and says Abel appeared to respect Stephanie Jones deeply.
• She indicates that she has no personal hostility toward Jones.
• NAG believes the declaration directly helps defend Abel against Jones’s claims of disloyalty and improper client solicitation.
• NAG also believes it supports Wayfarer because Jameela’s experience closely resembles Wayfarer’s account of leaving Jonesworks.
• In both accounts, the client independently chose to follow Abel, after which Stephanie Jones allegedly began emphasising a relationship that had previously received little attention.

We all remember this giant wall of text that Ryan Reynolds sent to Warren Zavala on August 9, 2024, and how it basically outlined Reynolds' entire plot to take down Baldoni with false accusations in order to redirect attention away from Lively and Reynolds' terrible marketing for IEWU. But we probably don't remember much of what was in it, since Reynolds talks so damn much that the little details get lost easily.

Well, after the recent unsealing, I gave it another read and noticed something really interesting on the second page of this exchange. Reynolds admits that he hasn't consulted with Lively on what he's literally texting about with Zavala.

(Bolded parts by me)

"I think it's fine to play through the weekend but I'm flying blind when it comes to Blake. We haven't had the chance to fully discuss the right course. I know she'll have a clear perspective. Unless something changed, all she cares about is the creative and a well-earned outcome. But I happen to think some action is necessary. She should not be subjected to some eye-roll-y narrative of the 'controlling bitch'"

"If I were those two guys, I'd be jumping in front of this now. With energy."

Wait, what's that now? According to Reynolds' own words, all Lively wants is to bask in the glory of a stolen PGA credit and making lots of money with a box office hit—there's no mention of her being concerned with the social media backlash at all. It's him who's bothered by it! He's the one who wants "action."

We already covered how he was having a meltdown behind the scenes about being implicated for his terrible marketing, but now we have proof that he knew he was making moves in Lively's name without her knowledge to save his own skin. It was his decision to coerce Wayfarer into making a public statement (that he wrote) to take the blame for his marketing. She didn't even know about it; he hadn't told her.

Now, before anyone says I'm absolving Lively, I'm not. The same quote shows that Lively was more than happy to steal creative and financial credit for a film she hijacked. But I've said all along that I believe Reynolds made sure Lively only knew about 30% of what went on in the lawsuit, and I stand by that. (Her knowledge of how badly he ruined her career likely jumped up to about 50% after Taylor Swift's wedding snub, which was too big of a shock for Reynolds to conceal/downplay.) It's a classic abusive partner tactic to hide contracts, bank accounts, communications, and access to business contacts, and this conversation with Zavala fits right into that pattern. Reynolds was making these huge, aggressive moves to save himself, all in his wife's name, and she had no idea.

Slandering Baldoni and the Wayfarer parties as misogynists was only ever the highest form of Ryan Reynolds' hypocrisy and projection.

📍Jones v Abel: Wayfarer files Motion for Summary Judgement against Jones/Jonesworks u/same-difference-ave

🔥🔥🔥 NotactuallyGolden - MOTION for Summary Judgment to Dismiss Stephanie Jones’s Remaining Claims (Part 1)

🔥🔥🔥 NotactuallyGolden - MOTION for Summary Judgment to Dismiss Stephanie Jones’s Remaining Claims (Part 2): The Evidence May Not Support Stephanie Jones’s Theory and Examines Jennifer Abel’s Strongest Summary Judgment Arguments

👩‍❤️‍💋‍👩👸🏻🙆🏻‍♀️ NotactuallyGolden - Jameela Jamil’s Declaration Backs Jennifer Abel and Wayfarer’s Version of Events in Support of MOTION for Summary Judgment to Dismiss Stephanie Jones’s Remaining Claims (Part 3)

⚖️ Challenges to the duty-of-loyalty claims | 0:00–1:13

• NAG continues her review of the defendants’ summary judgment motion.
• Jennifer Abel challenges the breach of fiduciary duty and “faithless servant” claims brought against her.
• Abel argues that the employment agreement refers generally to loyalty but fails to define what that obligation requires.
• According to Abel, a jury cannot determine whether she violated an undefined contractual duty.
• She also argues that the evidence uncovered during discovery does not support Jonesworks’ theory, even if the loyalty language is enforceable.

📣 When Jennifer Abel informed her clients | 1:13–2:00

• Abel says she did not inform clients of her planned departure until after she resigned, Stephanie Jones accepted her resignation and they agreed upon an approximately six-week transition period.
• She argues that notifying clients after announcing her departure cannot constitute improper solicitation.
• Any obligation to remain loyal had already changed once she formally resigned and disclosed her intention to leave.

👥 Evidence concerning employees and clients | 2:00–3:04

• Abel argues that there is no evidence she tried to recruit Jonesworks employees or steal its clients.
• She cites testimony from Stephanie Jones’s chief of staff stating that Abel never attempted to persuade employees to join her new company.
• Abel also provides declarations concerning clients who remained with Jonesworks or did not join.
• Country singer Lainey Wilson is given as one example of a former Abel client who never became a client.
• Jameela Jamil’s involvement deserves a separate video because Jamil has effectively become a narrator of the wider dispute.

✅ NAG’s assessment of Abel’s departure | 3:04–4:25

• Abel says she informed clients that she was leaving without asking them to follow her.
• Clients who wanted to continue working with Abel asked whether they could join her, while others remained with Jonesworks.
• Based on NAG's experience handling non-compete cases, NAG considers this a strong factual pattern for Abel.
• Abel allegedly gave notice before contacting clients, documented the process in writing and avoided approaching them secretly.
• NAG compares this with the ethical restrictions governing lawyers who leave firms and contact clients.
• Based on Abel’s account, NAG believes she appears to have handled the departure in a highly ethical manner.
• Abel therefore argues that her conduct could not have violated a contractual, fiduciary or loyalty obligation.

💰 Dispute over Jonesworks’ alleged damages | 4:25–5:39

• Abel separately argues that Jonesworks cannot establish recoverable damages.
• Jonesworks allegedly claims it lost profits when certain clients chose to follow Abel.
• Abel responds that this assumes those clients would otherwise have remained with Jonesworks, despite numerous people leaving the company at that time.
• Stephanie Jones also cites the expense of replacing Abel, but Abel argues that replacement costs ordinarily arise whenever an employee leaves.
• Abel says any claimed reputational harm stems from the previously dismissed defamation claim involving websites attacking Jones.
• The defendants argue that Jonesworks cannot recover those reputational damages through its remaining claims.
• Even if factual disputes exist over Abel’s loyalty, the claims could still fail because damages are a required element of a civil claim.

🔗 The tortious-interference claims explained | 5:39–6:22

• NAG turns to two tortious-interference claims that NAG has consistently regarded as weak.
• Tortious interference occurs when a third party intentionally disrupts another party’s contract or business relationship.
• Jonesworks alleges that Melissa Nathan, Wayfarer Studios and Justin Baldoni interfered with Abel’s employment agreement.
• It also alleges that Abel and Nathan interfered with the client agreement between Jonesworks and Wayfarer.
• The defendants argue that neither claim can survive under New York law.

🎯 Requirement to prove intentional interference | 6:22–7:15

• NAG explains that merely believing someone might affect an agreement is insufficient under New York law.
• Jonesworks must show that the defendants specifically intended to cause an actual contractual breach.
• It must therefore establish that Abel and Nathan intended to cause Wayfarer to breach its agreement with Jonesworks.
• It must also prove that Nathan, Wayfarer and the other named defendants intended to cause Abel to breach her employment agreement.
• The defendants maintain that discovery produced no evidence of this required intent.

📄 Defendants say they did not know the contract terms | 7:15–8:15

• The defendants argue that Melissa Nathan did not know the terms of Wayfarer’s agreement with Jonesworks.
• They also contend that Nathan and Wayfarer did not know the contents of Abel’s employment agreement.
• NAG considers this one of their strongest arguments because a person cannot intentionally interfere with contractual terms they do not know exist.
• The defendants point to evidence asserting that they were either unaware of the relevant agreements or did not know what those agreements required.

🏢 Jamey Heath says he alone ended Wayfarer’s agreement | 8:15–8:49

• In his declaration, Jamey Heath says he did not know whether Abel had an employment agreement with Jonesworks or what such an agreement contained.
• As Wayfarer’s CEO, Heath says he alone decided to terminate the company’s relationship with Jonesworks.
• He states that neither Jennifer Abel nor Melissa Nathan caused that decision.
• The defendants argue that this defeats the interference theory because Heath independently exercised Wayfarer’s contractual authority.

🧩 Defendants reject Jones’s alleged conspiracy | 8:49–9:40

• The motion ends by declaring that the evidentiary record is empty.
• Stephanie Jones’s theory portrays Abel’s departure as a coordinated conspiracy involving Abel, Wayfarer, Melissa Nathan, Justin Baldoni and Jamey Heath.
• But the discovery uncovered no evidence supporting that alleged conspiracy.
• Their position is that each person acted independently, pursued their own interests and exercised rights available under the relevant contracts and laws.
• They consequently argue that Jonesworks has no legal basis to recover damages through any of the remaining claims.

📍Jones v Abel: Wayfarer files Motion for Summary Judgement against Jones/Jonesworks u/same-difference-ave

🔥🔥🔥 NotactuallyGolden - MOTION for Summary Judgment to Dismiss Stephanie Jones’s Remaining Claims (Part 1)

🔥🔥🔥 NotactuallyGolden - MOTION for Summary Judgment to Dismiss Stephanie Jones’s Remaining Claims (Part 2): The Evidence May Not Support Stephanie Jones’s Theory and Examines Jennifer Abel’s Strongest Summary Judgment Arguments

👩‍❤️‍💋‍👩👸🏻🙆🏻‍♀️ NotactuallyGolden - Jameela Jamil’s Declaration Backs Jennifer Abel and Wayfarer’s Version of Events in Support of MOTION for Summary Judgment to Dismiss Stephanie Jones’s Remaining Claims (Part 3)

⚖️ Defendants seek summary judgment on all remaining claims | 0:00–1:44

• NAG reviews the summary judgment motion filed by Wayfarer Studios, Jennifer Abel, Melissa Nathan and Justin Baldoni against Stephanie Jones and Jonesworks.
• The defendants are asking Judge Liman to dismiss every remaining claim before trial.
• NAG explains that summary judgment is appropriate when there is no genuine dispute over a material fact for a jury to resolve.
• This may mean that no evidence supports part of a claim, all relevant evidence favours the defendants or an existing factual dispute would not affect the legal outcome.

🧑‍⚖️ Comparison with Blake Lively’s dismissed claims | 1:44–2:02

• NAG compares the motion with Judge Liman’s decision to dismiss ten of Blake Lively’s claims in the main litigation.
• The Wayfarer defendants are now asking the same judge to apply the summary judgment standard to Jones’s remaining claims.

🏢 Jennifer Abel’s departure from Jonesworks | 2:02–3:04

• NAG says the dispute centers on Jennifer Abel leaving Jonesworks during the summer of 2024 to establish her own PR company.
• Wayfarer Studios followed Abel and ended its relationship with Jonesworks.
• Melissa Nathan allegedly participated in discussions surrounding the departure and change in representation.
• NAG characterises the core dispute as a familiar employment scenario: an employee leaves, clients follow, the departure becomes hostile and litigation begins.

📰 Connection to the Blake Lively and Wayfarer dispute | 3:04–3:53

• The case became more complicated because the departure occurred as the conflict between Blake Lively, Justin Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios was escalating.
• NAG says this is where the wider smear campaign narrative began.
• Stephanie Jones obtained documents that were later provided to Leslie Sloane and Lively.
• Those documents eventually appeared in the New York Times reporting about the alleged campaign.

🔒 Sealed business records and new declarations | 3:53–5:20

• Many exhibits supporting the motion remain sealed because they contain Jonesworks’ proprietary business information and client agreement terms.
• But the general contents of these documents can still be inferred from the public filings.
• The motion includes declarations from Justin Baldoni, Jamey Heath in his capacity as Wayfarer’s CEO, Jennifer Abel and Melissa Nathan.
• NAG explains that attorneys ordinarily depose opposing witnesses and third parties rather than their own clients or witnesses.
• A party can instead obtain testimony from its own witnesses through declarations.
• She recommends reading these declarations because they include information absent from earlier depositions, either because attorneys did not ask about it or because it only became relevant at this stage.
• NAG also notes that the filings include two additional celebrity connections, one minor and one substantial, which she intends to discuss later.

🗽 Defendants argue that New York law controls | 5:20–6:04

• Wayfarer argues that New York law should govern the claims because both Abel’s employment agreement and Wayfarer’s client agreement with Jonesworks contain New York choice-of-law provisions.
• Although this may appear procedural, NAG says it matters because New York law supports several arguments the defendants raise later.
• She expects it would be difficult for Jones to oppose applying New York law when her company’s own agreements specify it.

🎯 Attempt to remove unnecessary individual plaintiffs and defendants | 6:04–8:08

• The defendants argue that Stephanie Jones should not personally bring claims involving contracts signed by Jonesworks.
• For example, Abel’s employment agreement was between Jennifer Abel and Jonesworks, leaving Stephanie Jones personally outside that contract.
• NAG expects the court could readily remove Jones as an individual plaintiff from claims concerning injuries allegedly suffered by the company.
• The motion similarly argues that Justin Baldoni should be removed as an individual defendant from claims arising from Wayfarer Studios’ agreement with Jonesworks.
• NAG says the same reasoning would apply to Jamey Heath individually because the relevant contracting party was Wayfarer Studios.
• Removing unnecessary individuals could affect how a jury perceives the case, limit counterclaim exposure and clarify which parties allegedly suffered damages.
• NAG considers narrowing the dispute to the relevant companies a sensible step before any potential trial.

🚫 Challenge to Jennifer Abel’s non-compete clause | 8:08–9:17

• The defendants argue that the non-compete provision in Abel’s employment agreement is legally unenforceable.
• NAG explains that non-compete clauses restrict employees from performing similar work after leaving a job and are increasingly disfavoured by courts.
• This clause allegedly restricts Abel from competing near Jonesworks locations in both New York and Los Angeles.
• NAG says its practical effect could prevent Abel from working in public relations across most of the country, making the restriction unusually broad.
• Under the defendants’ interpretation of New York law, the court can invalidate the provision without sending the issue to a jury.
• Invalidating it could undermine both the claim involving competition and solicitation and the related “faithless servant” claim.

📝 Alternative argument that Jones waived enforcement | 9:17–9:34

• The defendants argue that even if the non-compete provision might otherwise be enforceable, Jones waived her right to enforce it.
• They claim written records show that Jones permitted Abel to take certain clients with her, including Wayfarer Studios.
• Based on that alleged permission, the defendants contend that Jones cannot now rely on the agreement to challenge Abel’s work with Wayfarer.
• This could be an alternative route for Judge Liman to dismiss the claims involving the non-compete provision.

Obligatory Not A Lawyer, I'm just an engineer who is interested in this case and likes diving through the details :-). Since we a ton of evidence from the WFP v Lively, I wanted to focus on the new people - former Jonesworks clients and employees and the Breach of Contract claim against her that she violated the non-solicitation provisions of her employment agreement.

Starting with the Jameela Jamil declaration -

Jonesworks accuses Abel of soliciting six former Jonesworks clients with Jameela being one of them. Her declaration shows that her client relationship originated with Abel, not Jonesworks which is significant. Jonesworks seems to treat her as a Joneswork client that Abel later took and Abel can respond that historically that relationship went in the opposite direction AND she gave an independent reason why she left Jonesworks.

Jamil was represented by Jen Abel when she worked at the public relations agency PMK and followed her to Jonesworks is how it appears. Also she had already stopped paying Jonesworks months earlier because she was dissatisfied plus there's a possible waiver where Jones already authorized Abel to take Jameela away. I really don't know how Jones gets around this.

Former Jonesworks employees Matthew Mitchell and Johnny Gines:

The argument there is that Abel did not solicit or attempt to solicit Jonesworks' Employees. Since Abel was building a competing business, Abel allegedly solicited Jonesworks employees and them leaving is the evidence or damage from her actions.

Mitchell was a VP/SVP but left for his own personal reasons and says that not only was he not influenced by Abel to leave, but Abel never offered him a job or worked with Abel outside of their time together at Jonesworks. So what is the link between Mitchel leaving and Abel? There's no connection between him leaving being caused by Abel.

With Gines, he says that Neon Carnival had been his client for about 8 YEARS before he joined Jonesworks. Neon followed him to Jonesworks and isn't aware of Stpeh ever even having contact with a Neon representative. He actually left and formed NextGen PR in October 2024, told Neon that he left Jonesworks, and Neon hired his firm for a 2025 Coachella event. So that does any of this have to do with Abel? At that point he hires Abel for some freelance work for the Coachella project. So that is far removed from Abel reaching out to Neon and poaching them when they actually followed Gines when he left Jonesworks.

In addition to that - when Neon Carnival hired Jonesworks for prior Coachella events it was a specific 6-week contract not continuous and would hire them for specific period contract work so that gets in the way of Joneswork establishing any damages when they paid her for a specific 6-week contract that was already fulfilled.

I haven't looked at the rest of it but I'd be very surprised if Jones escapes this being tossed unless she provides some specific evidence.

Memorandum of Law - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.286.0.pdf

Declaration of Jameela Jamil- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.290.0.pdf

Declaration of Johnny Gines (Former Jonesworks employee)- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.291.0.pdf

Declaration of Matthew Mitchell (Former Jonesworks Employee)- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.293.0.pdf

He was identifying a possible counter-narrative.

He explains it below in his testimony: he was scared, felt outmatched by Blake Lively and her powerful circle, and thought he might need a way to defend himself if lies were spread about him.

His words were: “This is what we would need.”

He was showing his PR representative an example of a public narrative that resonated with him because he felt bullied and feared a PR fight was coming. The distinction between wanting to prepare a defense against a possible smear campaign and wanting to launch a campaign against Blake Lively is clear here. Justin wanted to prepare a defense after the onslaught by lively's camp.

In his deposition transcript, Justin explained that they were doing “scenario planning” and said that if Blake Lively made false statements about him, he would want to come forward with his own account. When asked whether he meant accusing Lively of bullying other women, he answered no, saying that his intention was to speak about what he personally experienced.

Court testimony — questioning by Mr. Gottlieb

Q: Why did you send it to Ms. Abel?

A: Again, we were in a place of defense. And as you may have seen from many of the early text threads you've shown me, I was afraid. At this point, I felt I was up against Goliath and Blake Lively and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, and everyone in their circle, Hugh Jackman, Shawn Levy, Taylor Swift.

By that point, as I testified earlier, I was essentially forced, or threatened, to step down off my film. I wasn't able to finish my own film even considering it tested higher. Somehow the actress of my movie who was not a producer was able to take complete control of the film.

By this point, Ms. Lively had requested that my name be removed. So I had my "a film by credit" removed. I was removed from the majority of marketing materials, from the poster. I was being removed, for the most, from the trailer. I know that she had been working with Taylor Swift to make sure that she got the song that she wanted in the film. And I had assumed that that was not a battle or a fight that I could ever win.

All of the cast had unfollowed me. Which is a very public thing to do right before a movie comes out, all in unison. And at that time, I was being threatened via my agency that if I didn't release a statement, then — then the gloves would come off.

Now, I don't know the exact sequence of the time in which I sent that text. But I will tell you that the feeling and the aura around the environment that was created, not by me at that time, created a lot of fear. I didn't know what was possible. So we were in a defensive mode because at this point, I didn't know what Ms. Lively or her group of powerful Hollywood elites were capable of.

So I saw a message — or I saw a tweet, which I did not read, and I saw that it was a celebrity woman who had a history of bullying. And I resonated with the term "bullying" because to me that was a true statement to what I experienced. I felt I was being very bullied.

So I sent that to Ms. Abel on a whim in an emotional state, but I made sure to preface it with, "this is what we would," with an emphasis and the operative word being "would." Not that we need to do this. Not that I want this. But this is what we would need if lies were to be spread about me intentionally.

Source: Deposition transcript, pp. 327–329.

For the unsealed messages, CLICK HERE.

Notice of Motion - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.284.0.pdf

Memorandum of Law - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.286.0.pdf

THE WAYFARER PARTIES’ RULE 56.1 STATEMENT OF
UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.287.0.pdf

Declaration of Justin Baldoni - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.288.0.pdf

Declaration of Jamey Heath - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.296.0.pdf

Exhibit B (HEATH_000046697–711) to Jamey Heath’s Declaration- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.296.2.pdf

Declaration of Melissa Nathan - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.289.0.pdf

Declaration of Jameela Jamil- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.290.0.pdf

Declaration of Johnny Gines (Former Jonesworks employee)- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.291.0.pdf

Declaration of Matthew Mitchell (Former Jonesworks Employee)- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.293.0.pdf

Declaration of Ellyn Garofalo - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.299.0.pdf

Exhibit 3 - Jen Abel Depo Excerpt - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.299.3.pdf

Exhibit 4 - Justin Baldoni Depo Excerpt- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.299.4.pdf

Exhibit 9- Jamey Heath Depo Excerpt- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.299.9.pdf

Exhibit 14- Melissa Nathan Depo Excerpt- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.299.14.pdf

I’m sorry, but to this day, I still laugh at how badly written this statement was and the audacity of expecting someone else to take the blame for their PR disaster.

I’m glad Baldoni stood his ground and refused to do it.

I thought I’d also share this clip for Throwback Thursday, showing Blake Lively initiating unscripted, unchoreographed kisses with Justin Baldoni, despite accusing him of similar behavior and framing it as sexual harassment. 

But you know, the audacity and hypocrisy of narcissists! 

I also went looking for the original post featuring this clip and found that it had been deleted by the original poster. That seemed like all the more reason to repost it!

Related Posts:

Blake Lively improvised kissing Justin Baldoni NINE times during IEWU by u/Serenity413

Blake Lively kissing Justin Baldoni (not scripted/added by Blake) (deleted post of video)

Unscripted kisses and physical touches initiated by Blake Lively even after the 17-pt demand letter by u/Enough_Gur_8833

Blake's "improvisation" and why you can't have it both ways by u/orangekirby

Sources:

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.958.0.pdf

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.1325.4_1.pdf

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.1244.0.pdf

Notice of Motion- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.295.0.pdf

Memorandum of Law- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.298.0.pdf

STEPHANIE JONES’ RULE 56.1 STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.300.0.pdf

Exhibit 2 - JONESWORKS_00030166_Redacted- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.307.2.pdf

Exhibit 3 - JONESWORKS_00007440 - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.298.3.pdf

Exhibit 4 -ABEL_000006072_Redacted - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.307.4.pdf

This space is designed to discuss all things relevant to the cases (even minor!) and those involved. Please feel free to share all types of questions, or share thoughtful opinions and theories.

The cases are complex and it can be difficult to both keep up with, and remember all the facts and details. New members or those seeking clarification are welcome to post here too.

If you have concerns about sub rules and/or sub moderation, please reach out via modmail.

This thread is designed to promote healthy and productive discussions and avoid low-effort or off-topic posts. Please keep things civil and respectful for the health of the community at large. 💗

As we eagerly wait for MSJs to drop, I figured I'd share a quick recap on which claims are remaining for each party .

Jonesworks

Wayfarer

Jennifer Abel

Any theories on arguments we're going to see?!?!

As confirmed in the attached, Ellyn Garofalo is scheduled to join the @nofilterwithzack show next week, and the teaser boldly promises she has "lots of shade to throw". 

For those who haven't been glued to the docket updates, Ellyn Garofalo is the powerhouse defense attorney who represented Justin Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios in the highly publicized federal litigation brought by Blake Lively. She consistently delivered aggressive and highly effective legal strategy throughout the It Ends With Us legal fallout.
Here is a breakdown of her most impactful work defending Wayfarer:

The September 2025 Motion: Garofalo provided the supporting declaration for a major motion for judgment on the pleadings filed on behalf of the Wayfarer Parties in September 2025.

Dismantling the $8M Fee Request: She methodically opposed Lively's massive $8 million attorney fee request, successfully arguing that Lively completely failed to meet the burden of proof required to justify the amount.

Exposing Billing Practices: Her opposition "surgically destroyed" the fee application by exposing 82 different timekeepers on Lively's legal team and highlighting allegedly unreasonable billing practices.

Calling Out Settlement Hypocrisy: During oral arguments, Garofalo directly challenged the opposing counsel, arguing to the judge that it was wrong for Lively to continue seeking damages and attorneys' fees after agreeing to a settlement where she dismissed her remaining claims.

Can't wait to see what behind-the-scenes tea drops on the podcast!

Let’s share our favorites Lady Ellyn’s moments

I really wish someone with true investigative skills could get to the bottom of this. Liz Plank would have known that Justin was working on It Ends With Us, which means she could (would) have told Blake. Remember, Blake was shopping around for a role at the time.

Liz Plank got a public shout-out from Ryan Reynolds for her book in late 2019. A few months later, she contacted Justin Baldoni. He appeared on her month-long podcast, Heart Homework, in June 2020. She gave him another public shout-out, and then he hired her for The Man Enough Podcast, which launched June 14, 2021.

Liz was on the red carpet for both Free Guy and The Adam Project with Ryan and Blake.

In 2020, Liz co-founded The Meteor. She held their meetings at Gloria Steinem’s home around the same time Alex Saks premiered Gloria’s movie, which she had produced with Steinem.

Amber Tamblyn joined The Meteor along with Megan Twohey. Megan and Amber spoke at a Meteor-hosted event called Meet the Moment in November 2022, one month before Blake Lively was hired.

In August 2024, Liz Plank and Amber Tamblyn were photographed together at a Hotties for Harris event, where Amber bragged about Liz’s after-party. I mean, they are all connected.

Side quest: Alex Saks investigated Justin in 2019, and knowing that she made the woman's movie who helped co-found Liz's organization makes me wonder if Liz told her about Justin, too, which was WHY she investigated Justin. LINK HERE

In light of yet another SEO manipulation attempt by the Lively-Reynolds camp following the release of the recent text messages, I thought this would be a good one for Throwback Thursday. 

Remember when an email included in a legal filing contained Justin’s quote, “The last thing I want to do is kiss this woman,” and just four days later, an article titled “What Actors Have to Say About Kissing Blake Lively” appeared? And of course, the article makes sure to mention “minty-fresh makeouts” when talking about her “on-screen smooches.” 😂

Now, following the release of the recent text messages in which Ryan accused Justin of paying $500,000 to smear Blake, we have another article about a $500,000 donation from years ago suddenly appearing just days later.

Given the pattern we’ve observed, I thought this earlier example (one of many) was worth revisiting. Funny how the timing lines up. 👀

Related Posts:

Ryan Reynolds really doesn't want people to know he falsely accused Justin of spending $500000 to smear Blake. by u/Glass-Detective4312

Where did Ryan Reynolds get the number "$500,000" in his (imo) borderline defamatory communication about Justin Baldoni? by u/Money-Character9758

An unsealed Ryan Reynolds’ text suggests Stephanie Jones disclosed private client information before Vanzan was conceived by u/Enough_Gur_8833

u/Enough_Gur_8833’s excellent analysis of where Ryan's $500,000 figure may have originated 

"The last thing I want to do is kiss this woman" by u/Peaceful_Ocean_9513

Justin Baldoni said "the last thing I want to do is kiss this woman." So Leslie Sloan and Blake Lively put a story out about Blake kissing people.😂 by u/the_smart_girl

This video by CC Lethal Lauren is parody and satire.

https://youtube.com/shorts/QAtYJut3p_Q?si=z8A9_JjGKqWxUhLv

Full transcript:

"Good afternoon, fellow truth-seekers.

I come to you as president of the Flat Earth Society with some disturbing revelations about Justin Baldoni and a sophisticated network of people who appear to know each other.

Now, let me explain this slowly because apparently some of you still believe the earth is round.

A woman named Benita Litt served on the board of the Wayfarer Foundation.

Justin Baldoni also served on the board of the Wayfarer Foundation.

Coincidence? I doubt it!

But it gets worse.

Benita Litt is connected to a company that sells children's vitamins.

Do you know who has children? Justin Baldoni.

And a nutritionist recommended by Justin Baldoni apparently recommended vitamins to Blake Lively.

Now, some of you may be accurately realizing that this is a threat to national security.

Now, how is that? Well, as you know, children are the future, so anyone connected to children is connected to America's future; that is basic mathematics.

I would know; I studied it extensively.

But the conspiracy goes even deeper.

Benita Litt is reportedly friends with Meghan Markle.

Meghan Markle married a member of the British royal family.

You know who fought an entire revolution to get away from the British? America.

Our founding fathers did not cross the Delaware so that Justin Baldoni could have a friend whose friend's husband allegedly sells vitamins.

And yet those outside of the mainstream media want you all to believe that those are coincidences.

What more evidence could you possibly need?

You, with the bald head.

- Yeah, you have any evidence that Justin Baldoni was actually involved with anything here? -

I'm sorry, were you not listening??

His nutritionist knew about vitamins! 

And let me remind you, the word "vitamin" contains seven letters.

Baldoni also contains seven letters! 

Explain that, Gerald!

Now, I know Americans are frightened by Justin Baldoni's toxic levels of positivity.

We have credible reports that Baldoni is going around telling people that they are enough.

Enough for what, Mr. Baldoni? Answer the question!

His relentless campaign of unsolicited affirmations, weaponized empathy, and aggressive emotional wellness threatens the very fabric of our society.

The American people deserved to live in a country where they can hate themselves in peace! 

But I am pleased to announce that after extensive research, we have discovered a solution: “Reynolds Wrap.” That's right.

We are recommending two layers of Reynolds Wrap for anyone who has ever been told to hold space for their feelings.

The threat level has officially been raised from "namaste" to "live-laugh-lockup".

If you think it's a coincidence that the only product capable of protecting Americans contains the same name as Ryan Reynolds, you're part of the problem.

To the men of America, if Justin Baldoni approaches you and asks how you're really doing, do not engage.

That is how the radical empathy enters your bloodstream."