Blake Lively, Ryan Reynolds Seek to Protect Text Messages With Friends Amid Justin Baldoni Legal Battle

Blake Lively and Ryan Reynold’s attorney requested an extra layer of protection on sensitive information during a March 6 hearing amid their legal battle with Justin Baldoni.

Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds are requesting to keep some things private.

Amid the couple’s sprawling legal battle with It Ends With Us director Justin Baldoni, their attorney Meryl Governski requested an additional protective order for “already non-public information” conversations with other “high profile individuals” during a virtual court hearing March 6.

“There is a significant chance of irreparable harm if marginal conversations with high profile individuals with no relevance to the case were to fall into wrong hands,” Governski argued during the hearing. “There are 100 million reasons for these parties to leak information because the PR value is greater than complying with the court’s orders.”

Governski also requested to U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman that other sensitive information in discovery be designated as “attorney eyes only,” which means the information would only be viewed by the party’s attorney and not the party itself.

The request would cover information related to the “physical and mental health of the parties,” “speaking about children,” “locations of private residences or homes,” “non-related third parties,” and “personal and intimate conversations with unrelated third parties.”

Justin Baldoni, Blake Lively
read
Judge in Justin Baldoni’s Multi-Million Lawsuit Against The New York Times Pauses Discovery
Sigrid McCawley, who represents Lively and Reynold’s publicist Leslie Sloane, echoed Governski’s point. McCawley argued that Sloane—who is named in the $400 million defamation lawsuit filed by Baldoni’s team alongside her clients and The New York Times—would have to disclose information that could be accessed by her competitors and would “cause business harm.”

“There is sensitive information to protect, including trade secrets, marketing plans and business strategies, discussions regarding other clients and nonpublic projects,” she said of Sloane’s company Vision PR. “This is a feud between PR firms … trade secrets and confidential information.”

However, Baldoni’s attorney Bryan Freedman argued that the additional protective order was “overboard and unnecessary.”