Months after a resolution to the sprawling legal battle over the filming of It Ends With Us, Hollywood power lawyer Bryan Freedman is still dealing with fallout from the case.
Zoey 101 alum Alexa Nikolas won a key ruling on Wednesday in a defamation lawsuit against Freedman, with a court finding that she’s established a probability of prevailing on defamation claims accusing him and those in his orbit of marshaling a smear campaign against her.
Nikolas, founder of advocacy organization Eat Predators, has a long and contentious history with Freedman, who had represented her ex-husband Michael Milosh when she sued the musician for sexual abuse. She had organized protests outside of his offices in 2022 after discovering that he had also been accused of sexual assault in a case that resulted in a no-fault settlement in 1991. Around the time of these protests, a smear site that aimed to undermine her activism — including through assertions that her current husband was a predator — popped up about her.
Nikolas didn’t connect Freedman to the site until Lively sued It Ends With Us director Justin Baldoni and his production company Wayfarer. The thrust of Lively’s lawsuit focused on alleged sexual harassment on the set of the film, but it also accused Baldoni and his public relations team — led by top crisis publicist Melissa Nathan and digital fixer Jed Wallace — of spawning a smear machine that threatened her reputation. This led to sister lawsuits, including one from publicist Stephanie Jones, who claimed that Nathan and Wallace have long engaged in creating smear sites targeting women. That gave Nikolas the ammunition to file a lawsuit, which points to alleged data identifying Freedman as involved in the generation of some of the sites.
In Wednesday’s ruling, Los Angeles Superior Court judge Michael Whitaker rebuffed Freedman’s bid to dismiss the case. He concluded that Nikolas has produced enough evidence to potentially prove the alleged campaign was defamatory.
Among the findings: Nikolas sufficiently demonstrated a probability of proving the allegedly defamatory statements were untrue. This includes a claim on a second smear site about her that she partnered with former California senator Joe Dunn to push others into making false accusations of sexual assault.
Whitaker also pointed to court records across multiple cases in which several plaintiffs describe a “similar modus operandi and common website traffic optimization tactics.”
Freedman had argued that Nikolas can’t prove the assertions advanced in the sites were false and that some were simply statements of opinion, which can’t give rise to a defamation claim. On this front, the court said that the allegations in the site “all imply provably false assertions of fact” that Nikolas is “either a criminal who has committed criminal acts, or she is not.”
Multiple smear sites identified in the case between Jones and Baldoni appear to have evidence of common authorship, including Alexanikolas.net, which claimed she extorted multiple ex-boyfriends by threatening them with manufacturing sexual abuse claims, among other things. In Jones’ case, a cybersecurity expert submitted an expert report indicating that those who created the site about Nikolas may have also created ones about Amanda Ghost, who’s engaged in a defamation battle against Rebel Wilson.
“There is a tangled web of connections between these sites and numerous others in addition to that authored about plaintiff,” Whitaker wrote, noting a “conspiracy to smear various individuals” who had adversarial connections to Freedman’s clients. That not only suggests a motive, the court found, but also indicates that the lawyer may have been “involved in directing or otherwise effectuating all of those alleged smear campaigns.”
Earlier this year, Wilson’s crisis public relations team — comprised of Nathan and Wallace — was heard discussing plans to create anonymous sites that accused Ghost of sex trafficking as part of an alleged smear campaign solicited by the actress against The Deb producer. In a recording obtained by The Hollywood Reporter, Wallace instructed Nathan to assert without evidence that Ghost is a “madame” whose work involves procuring young women for wealthy and powerful men.
“We can’t just do, like, oh, she’s a bitch, she sucks,” Wallace says in the recording. “It’s, like, it’s got to be really, really heavy and connected to something that heavy.”
At one point in the conversation, Wallace referenced the involvement of Freedman, Wilson’s then-counsel in the case. Freedman and Nathan didn’t respond to requests for comment, though they’ve previously denied involvement in the creation of the smear sites.
THR Newsletters
Sign up for THR news straight to your inbox every day
Facts Only
* Alexa Nikolas won a key ruling in a defamation lawsuit against Bryan Freedman.
* The court found a probability that statements by Freedman and his orbit defamed Nikolas.
* Nikolas founded the advocacy organization Eat Predators.
* Freedman represented Nikolas's ex-husband, Michael Milosh.
* Nikolas organized protests in 2022 after discovering allegations against Milosh regarding sexual assault.
* Lively sued Justin Baldoni and his production company Wayfarer regarding alleged sexual harassment on a film set.
* The lawsuit accused Baldoni's team of creating a smear machine threatening Nikolas's reputation.
* Sister lawsuits involved publicist Stephanie Jones claiming Nathan and Wallace created smear sites targeting women.
* Evidence included claims on a second smear site involving partnership with Joe Dunn to push false accusations.
* Court records showed similar "modus operandi" among plaintiffs across multiple cases.
* A court noted that the allegations implied provably false assertions of fact regarding Nikolas.
Executive Summary
A defamation lawsuit was won by Alexa Nikolas against Hollywood power lawyer Bryan Freedman, with the court finding a probability that statements made by Freedman and his associates constituted defamation against her. This ruling stemmed from allegations that Freedman and those in his orbit orchestrated a smear campaign against Nikolas. The dispute involves a history between Nikolas and Freedman, stemming from Freedman’s representation of Nikolas's ex-husband, Michael Milosh, and subsequent protests organized by Nikolas regarding alleged sexual assault accusations. The lawsuit expanded to include claims made through various online smear sites that targeted Nikolas and others.
The court found that the allegations in some smear sites implied provably false assertions of fact, leading to a finding that Nikolas was either a criminal or not. Evidence presented included court records showing similar patterns of conduct among plaintiffs across multiple cases and expert reports linking creators of certain websites. The judge rejected Freedman's argument that the statements were merely opinion, ruling instead that they implied false facts.
Full Take
Sentinel — Human
The text reads like a synthesis of complex legal fallout, using specific evidence to map out connections, which is characteristic of well-researched human reporting rather than pure generative output.
