No, Taylor Swift has not “agreed” to sit for a deposition with Justin Baldoni‘s lawyers as Blake Lively‘s It Ends With Us lawsuit moves closer to trial — but if the court allows a late notice of subpoena, she may have no choice, her lawyer said Friday.
In a letter to the judge overseeing the high-profile celebrity dispute, Swift’s lawyer, Douglas Baldridge, refuted the claim made by one of Baldoni’s lawyers on Thursday that the “Blank Space” singer was ready and willing to sit for the examination. The Thursday letter from Baldoni’s lawyer, Ellyn S. Garofalo, claimed Swift “has agreed to appear for deposition but is unable to do so before October 20, 2025.” The letter requested an extension of the discovery deadline to accommodate Swift’s schedule.
“As counsel for the parties know, since the inception of this matter, we have consistently maintained that my client has no material role in this action,” Baldridge wrote in his Friday letter filed in federal court in Manhattan. “Further, my client did not agree to a deposition, but if she is forced into a deposition, we advised – after first hearing about the deposition just three days ago – that her schedule would accommodate the time required during the week of October 20 if the parties were able to work out their disputes. We take no role in those disputes.”
Lively is suing Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios with claims of sexual harassment and retaliation. Swift was initially ensnared in the fight when Baldoni filed a dueling defamation lawsuit against Lively that included claims Swift was present during a pivotal meeting at Lively’s Tribeca penthouse that involved Lively’s efforts to make changes to the movie script.
In a separate response letter on Friday, one of Lively’s lawyers blasted Baldoni’s camp for an “astounding” lack of respect for “Swift’s privacy and schedule.” The lawyer urged the court to deny Baldoni’s request for the late deposition.
“The Wayfarer defendants have repeatedly sought to bring Ms. Swift into this litigation to fuel their relentless media strategy. In this latest effort, the Wayfarer defendants assert – though, notably, without evidence – that Ms. Swift has supposedly ‘agreed’ to sit for a deposition sometime between October 20-25, some three weeks after the close of fact discovery in this matter,” Lively’s lawyer Michael J. Gottlieb wrote in his opposition.
“Ms. Swift is someone whose calendar should be presumed to be packed with professional obligations for months in advance,” he continued. “At any point over the past six months, the Wayfarer defendants could have noticed a deposition, served a subpoena, and negotiated an agreeable time and place for this deposition. But they did not. Instead, the Wayfarer Defendants previously noticed Ms. Swift’s deposition in May 2025, accompanied by a barrage of press stories covering the same, only to withdraw that subpoena to much fanfare.”
Gottlieb claimed Baldoni and Wayfarer did “not even attempt to explain their need for [Swift’s] deposition.” He further accused them of trying “to generate a media spectacle in this matter.”
It wasn’t immediately clear on Friday how the judge might rule. A rep for Swift did not respond to a request for comment. The pop star has a new album, The Life of a Showgirl, set for release Oct. 3.
Swift previously had a very public friendship with Lively, though they have not been seen together in months. In his court filings, Baldoni claimed that Swift — originally described in filings as a “megacelebrity” — supported Lively’s edits to the script, as did Lively’s husband, the actor Ryan Reynolds. Baldoni further alleged that at one point, Lively sent him a text message referring to Swift and Reynolds as her “dragons.” Baldoni said he interpreted the message as a suggestion Lively could tap Swift to “make things very difficult for him.”
“If you ever get around to watching Game of Thrones, you’ll appreciate that I’m Khaleesi, and like her, I happen to have a few dragons,” the purported text from Lively read. “For better or worse, but usually better. Because my dragons also protect those I fight for. So really we all benefit from those gorgeous monsters of mine. You will too, I can promise you.”
A rep for Swift previously slammed Baldoni’s prior attempts to subpoena the singer. “Taylor Swift never set foot on the set of this movie, she was not involved in any casting or creative decisions, she did not score the film, she never saw an edit or made any notes on the film,” the rep told Rolling Stone in May. The rep said the subpoena was “designed to use Taylor Swift’s name to draw public interest by creating tabloid clickbait instead of focusing on the facts of the case.”
Lively’s battle with Baldoni exploded last year when The New York Times published a Dec. 21 story titled “‘We Can Bury Anyone’: Inside a Hollywood Smear Machine.” The story revealed Lively had filed a complaint against Baldoni with the California Civil Rights Department.
Lively later sued in public court, alleging Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios subjected her to sexual harassment during production and then a subsequent smear campaign. Baldoni denied the allegations and countersued Lively, Reynolds, and their publicist, alleging civil extortion and defamation. Baldoni’s $400 million defamation complaint against Lively was dismissed in June.
