Blake Lively’s legal battles stemming from her “It Ends With Us” dispute with Justin Baldoni are not yet over, with a Texas court filing this week seeking to force the actress to sit for another deposition, this time in a separate fight over roughly $800,000 in attorneys’ fees involving a crisis public relations consultant who worked with Baldoni’s team.

Jed Wallace, a crisis communications specialist who worked with Baldoni’s side during the broader legal dispute, filed new documents asking a Texas judge to compel Lively to appear for questioning, according to TMZ. The request comes months after Wallace’s own defamation lawsuit against Lively was dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction, with the fight now centered specifically on Lively’s bid to recover legal fees from Wallace following that dismissal.

What Wallace Is Seeking

According to the new filing, Wallace wants any deposition limited specifically to Lively’s claims for attorneys’ fees and damages, arguing he should be permitted to question what she knew and believed at the time she made statements involving him and his company, Street Relations Inc. Wallace contends that examining whether Lively’s underlying allegations were made with malice could directly affect whether he can be held responsible for her legal bills, a distinct legal question from the substance of the harassment allegations that originally triggered the broader litigation.

Lively’s Team Pushes Back Sharply

Lively’s legal team rejected Wallace’s latest filing in blunt terms in a statement to TMZ. “Jed Wallace already took Ms. Lively’s deposition. His case was dismissed. Ms. Lively won,” her attorneys said, describing the new request as “another desperate, meritless attempt.” Her team further argued that Wallace’s real motivation is concern over potentially being ordered to cover her legal costs, drawing a direct comparison to the outcome of Lively’s separate, larger fee dispute with Baldoni and his production company, Wayfarer Studios, in New York, where a judge similarly ruled she could pursue reasonable fees following that litigation.

A Case With a Complicated Procedural History

Wallace originally sued Lively in Texas over her allegations, but that lawsuit stalled after a judge ruled the Texas court lacked personal jurisdiction over the actress. Following that dismissal, Lively turned around and sought to recover roughly $800,000 in attorneys’ fees from Wallace, along with additional costs and damages tied to defending against his suit. It is that fee request, rather than the original underlying allegations, that now forms the basis of the current deposition dispute, with Wallace arguing that if Lively is seeking substantial money from him, he should be entitled to question her directly about the claims that led to his own lawsuit in the first place.

A Separate but Related Fight With Baldoni Himself

The Texas dispute with Wallace runs parallel to a considerably larger fee battle Lively has waged directly against Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios in New York, stemming from the defamation lawsuit Baldoni originally filed against her, her husband Ryan Reynolds, and her publicist Leslie Sloane. After a judge dismissed that suit, along with a related $250 million claim Baldoni had separately filed against The New York Times, Lively’s attorneys filed a motion seeking approximately $8 million in attorneys’ fees and litigation costs, arguing the underlying lawsuit amounted to retaliatory litigation. In their filing, Lively’s lawyers wrote that the goal of Baldoni’s original suit “was not meant to win in court – its aim was to retaliate against Lively by falsely branding her a liar, intimidating witnesses and the media, and discouraging others from speaking out.”

Baldoni’s legal team has pushed back forcefully against that fee request, calling the roughly $7.5 million in billed attorney hours “stunning” and accusing Lively’s team of inflating the time spent on the case. According to court filings reviewed by Forbes, Baldoni’s lawyers argued the request covered more than 7,000 hours of legal work, which they characterized as roughly 20 times the amount courts have typically found reasonable in comparable defamation cases, and urged the court to deny the request entirely or substantially reduce it.

Baldoni Breaks His Public Silence

Amid the ongoing fee disputes, Baldoni spoke publicly about the litigation for the first time in recent weeks, posting a video alongside his wife, Emily Baldoni, in which he thanked supporters and said he was still “healing” from what he described as a “traumatic” legal fight. Emily Baldoni characterized the couple as victims of “injustice” in the same video, saying they had struggled to understand how the situation unfolded, particularly given that it had been framed publicly as, in her words, “a fight for women.” Baldoni said he had largely remained quiet throughout the litigation because he “didn’t want to add to the noise,” preferring to let the legal process play out.

A Feud With No Clear End in Sight

The underlying dispute between Lively and Baldoni traces back to December 2024, when Lively first filed allegations that Baldoni sexually harassed her during production of “It Ends With Us.” Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios responded with a $400 million countersuit against Lively, Reynolds and Sloane, alleging civil extortion, defamation and invasion of privacy, along with a separate $250 million libel suit against The New York Times. Both of those countersuits were ultimately dismissed by a federal judge earlier this year, clearing the way for the current phase of the litigation, which now centers largely on which side must cover the substantial legal costs both parties have accumulated throughout the sprawling case.

With the Texas deposition request now pending before a judge and the larger New York fee dispute between Lively and Baldoni still awaiting a final ruling, both matters remain unresolved heading into the fall. Whether Lively is ultimately compelled to sit for additional questioning in the Wallace matter, and how much of her requested $8 million fee award from Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios a judge ultimately approves, are expected to be among the next major developments in a legal saga that has already stretched well beyond its original defamation claims into an extended fight over the financial costs of the litigation itself.

This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of VZ, UNH either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

Kevin Love, a key member of the Cleveland Cavaliers’ 2016 championship team, is now actively trying to join former teammate LeBron James in Philadelphia, according to multiple reports, a development that adds a new layer of sting for a Cavaliers franchise that had itself been in the mix for James before he ultimately signed with the 76ers.

Love’s agent, Jeff Schwartz of Excel Sports Management, has been in contact with the 76ers’ front office ever since James announced his decision to sign with Philadelphia last month, according to ESPN’s Dave McMenamin. Love, now 37, is hoping to reunite with James for one final championship run, a pursuit that has continued for days even as Philadelphia’s roster situation has made a formal signing anything but simple.

A Bond That Dates Back to a Title in Cleveland

Love and James spent four seasons together with the Cavaliers, from 2014 through 2018, reaching the NBA Finals in each of those years and capturing the franchise’s first championship together in 2016. That title, delivered after Cleveland overcame a 3-1 series deficit against the Golden State Warriors, remains one of the most celebrated moments in the franchise’s history, and Love has long been closely associated with that era of Cavaliers basketball alongside James and Kyrie Irving.

The two players have remained close in the years since James left Cleveland, reportedly vacationing together extensively earlier this summer, a detail that has fueled speculation about Love’s interest in following James to Philadelphia. NBA insider Evan Sidery reported on the interest directly, writing, “Kevin Love wants to join the Sixers, which would reunite him with LeBron James before retirement.”

A Roster Puzzle Still Unsolved

Despite the mutual interest, actually completing a deal remains complicated. According to McMenamin’s reporting, the 76ers currently sit just $1.83 million below their first-apron hard cap and already have 14 players on standard contracts, leaving no immediate room to add Love on a veteran minimum deal without first shedding another player’s salary. Philadelphia reached that 14-player limit after signing another former James teammate, guard Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, who agreed to a buyout with the Memphis Grizzlies and subsequently signed a one-year, $3.9 million deal with the 76ers shortly after James’ own signing was finalized.

The most likely candidate for a corresponding roster move is forward Jabari Walker, whose $2.58 million salary includes only $250,000 in guaranteed money, making him the most easily movable piece on Philadelphia’s current roster. Even so, PhillyVoice noted that Walker remains the team’s best rebounder and a genuinely playable rotation piece, complicating the calculus of waiving him purely to accommodate a 37-year-old Love, who was not consistently in Utah’s rotation last season. According to salary cap expert Yossi Gozlan, the earliest Philadelphia could realistically sign Love to a rest-of-season minimum contract, absent a roster move, would be the first week of December, or potentially after February’s trade deadline.

What Love Would Bring to Philadelphia

Love remained a useful contributor for the Utah Jazz last season, averaging 6.7 points, 5.8 rebounds and 1.8 assists per game across roughly 16.6 minutes per contest. Analysts have pointed to his floor-spacing ability as a potential fit alongside Philadelphia’s crowded frontcourt, where the 76ers currently rely on Joel Embiid as their starting center, backed up by younger options in Adem Bona and Ariel Hukporti, neither of whom offers the same outside shooting or offensive spacing that Love could theoretically provide. Analysts have suggested Love’s shooting could pull opposing centers away from the rim, opening driving lanes for James, Tyrese Maxey, Jaylen Brown and V.J. Edgecombe.

A Career Built Across Multiple Franchises

Love entered the NBA in 2008 with the Minnesota Timberwolves, where he starred through 2014, earning the league’s Most Improved Player award in 2011, the same season he made his first All-Star appearance. He was later traded to Cleveland, where he teamed with James to reach four consecutive NBA Finals and win the 2016 title. Since departing Cleveland, Love has spent time with the Miami Heat and, most recently, the Utah Jazz, adding to a career resume that now includes five All-Star selections, two All-NBA nods and an NBA championship.

A Second Sting for Cleveland

For Cavaliers fans, Love’s pursuit of a reunion with James in Philadelphia lands as a fresh reminder of the franchise’s own unsuccessful effort to bring James back to Cleveland this offseason. James had drawn out his free agency decision for nearly a month before ultimately choosing Philadelphia, a move ESPN’s Dave McMenamin described as considered a surprising one around the league at the time, given the Cavaliers’ own reported interest in a potential reunion. With Love, one of the most beloved figures from Cleveland’s championship era, now actively lobbying to join James in Philadelphia rather than pursuing any reunion of his own with the Cavaliers, the development has added an extra layer of disappointment for a fan base still processing James’ decision to sign elsewhere.

Philadelphia’s Star-Studded Offseason Continues

Love’s pursuit fits into a broader pattern that has defined Philadelphia’s offseason since landing James. The 76ers’ roster overhaul began with the blockbuster acquisition of former Boston Celtics champion Jaylen Brown, a move that helped position the franchise as a legitimate contender to attract James in the first place. Since James’ signing became official, Philadelphia has continued adding pieces connected to his career, including Caldwell-Pope, underscoring how directly James’ arrival has reshaped the franchise’s roster construction throughout the summer.

With Philadelphia’s roster currently at its 14-player limit and no immediate mechanism to add Love without a corresponding move, his path onto the 76ers’ roster appears more likely to materialize later in the season, whether through a in-season roster adjustment, an injury opening a need, or a trade deadline transaction, rather than an immediate offseason signing. For now, Love’s public interest in joining James stands as confirmation that his desire to chase one more championship alongside his former Cleveland teammate remains very much alive, even if the logistics of making it happen in Philadelphia remain unresolved heading into training camp.

Martha Stewart’s account of a recent dinner party encounter with Meghan Markle is facing a direct challenge from the person who hosted the event, who says Stewart’s version of what the Duchess of Sussex discussed that night is simply not accurate.

Stewart, 85, told People in a new interview that she and Meghan were both guests at a dinner party in California shortly after the Duchess returned from a trip to Europe that included a reunion with King Charles III. “She had just gotten back from the palace,” Stewart said. “I didn’t talk to her really more than to say a couple words, but I know she was talking about it.”

A Host Offers a Different Account

That characterization did not sit well with the person who organized the dinner, who told Page Six that Stewart’s recollection of events was inaccurate. “I sat next to Meghan at the dinner party and this account of what happened is simply untrue,” the host said. “Meghan didn’t talk about her European vacation other than to say the family had a great time.” The host did not elaborate further on what else was discussed that evening.

According to a separate account relayed to People, the same host said Meghan has long admired Stewart and had enjoyed the brief opportunity to meet her at the dinner, a detail that suggests the interaction, whatever was actually said, was a positive one from Meghan’s side regardless of the disputed specifics.

What Stewart’s Comment Actually Referred To

Stewart’s reference to Meghan having “just gotten back from the palace” appears tied to Meghan and Prince Harry’s broader European trip this summer, during which the couple and their two children, Archie, 7, and Lilibet, 5, met with King Charles and Queen Camilla on July 10 at Highgrove House, the king’s country estate in England. Notably, the reunion took place at Highgrove rather than at any formal royal palace, a distinction some outlets have pointed to in questioning how literally to interpret Stewart’s “palace” reference. Newsweek reported that Meghan was actually asked about her European vacation more broadly during the dinner conversation, rather than specifically about the Highgrove meeting, suggesting some headlines characterizing the exchange as Meghan “boasting” about the royal reunion may have overstated what Stewart’s comments actually established.

The Highgrove gathering marked the first time Charles had seen his American-based grandchildren in person since 2022, when the family last gathered for Queen Elizabeth II’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations. The king, who has continued treatment for cancer, met with the family alongside Camilla in what royal commentators described as a significant, if carefully managed, step toward repairing years of estrangement between Harry, Meghan and the wider royal family.

Meghan and Harry’s broader summer travels extended beyond the United Kingdom as well. According to Town & Country, the family also spent time in Melides, Portugal, sometimes described as the “Hamptons of Portugal,” a destination the Sussexes have visited regularly in recent years and reportedly purchased a home in back in 2024. A source told People in late July that Harry and Meghan are drawn to Portugal specifically because it allows Archie and Lilibet to, in the source’s words, “simply be kids.”

Stewart Also Weighed In on Meghan’s Netflix Show

Beyond the disputed dinner party account, Stewart used the same interview to offer a pointed assessment of Meghan’s broader career transition, referencing the Duchess’s Netflix lifestyle series “With Love, Meghan,” in which Meghan shares cooking, baking, decorating and entertaining tips. “If you’re an actress, it’s hard to then transition to a princess and then from a princess into a homemaking guru on a television show,” Stewart said. “It doesn’t sort of follow. So go from there.” The remark, delivered by one of the most established figures in the American homemaking and lifestyle media space, was widely interpreted as at least mildly skeptical of Meghan’s pivot into the same general content category Stewart herself has built a decades-long career around.

A Story That Fits a Familiar Pattern

Newsweek noted that the sequence of events, an initial celebrity claim followed by a competing account from someone else present, echoes a recurring pattern in coverage of Meghan and Harry dating back years. The outlet pointed to Harry’s own remarks during a 2023 interview promoting his memoir “Spare,” in which he said that every time he had tried to address issues privately, there had been “briefings and leakings and planting of stories” against him and his wife, criticizing what he characterized as the royal family’s informal motto of “never complain, never explain.” Whether or not this particular dinner party dispute reflects that same dynamic, the underlying pattern, dueling and often contradictory anonymous or semi-anonymous accounts of private social interactions involving Meghan, has recurred repeatedly across royal media coverage over the past several years.

A History of Disputed Claims

This is not the first time a report involving Meghan has been directly and publicly disputed by another party close to the situation. Kensington Palace has previously issued rare, direct denials of specific claims about Meghan, including a 2018 report alleging a heated argument between Meghan and Catherine, Princess of Wales, ahead of Meghan’s wedding, which a palace spokesperson at the time flatly denied, saying, “This never happened.” That history of competing narratives, official or informal, underscores the difficulty of establishing a fully agreed-upon account whenever conflicting versions of a private social interaction involving Meghan become public.

What Remains Unclear

For now, the central factual dispute, whether Meghan discussed her European trip and royal reunion at length during the California dinner, as Stewart suggested, or only briefly mentioned that the family had a good time, as the event’s host maintains, remains unresolved, with both accounts attributed to named or clearly identified sources rather than anonymous insiders. Neither Meghan nor her representatives have publicly commented on either version of events, and it remains unclear whether any further clarification will be offered as the story continues to circulate across entertainment and royal media coverage this week.