- Judge Thomas D. Long permits limited discovery for producer Amanda Ghost in her separate defamation suit against Rebel Wilson.
- The court denied depositions of Wilson and publicist Melissa Nathan but allowed questioning of former employee Katie Case.
- The dispute stems from social media posts about alleged misconduct on the set of Wilson’s 2024 film “The Deb.”
- Wilson has invoked California’s anti‑SLAPP statute; the battle over dismissal and discovery continues amid appeals.
Judge allows limited discovery in producer’s bid to oppose dismissal
A Los Angeles judge this week granted limited discovery to Amanda Ghost, one of three producers suing actress-director Rebel Wilson for defamation over social media statements tied to the 2024 film “The Deb.” The ruling narrows what evidence Ghost may gather while she seeks to oppose Wilson’s motion to dismiss under California’s anti‑SLAPP law.
What the judge ruled
In an order from Judge Thomas D. Long, Ghost was allowed to pursue some interim discovery but was denied requests to depose Rebel Wilson and publicist Melissa Nathan. The court did, however, permit the deposition of Katie Case, a former employee of Nathan and Nathan’s company, the Agency Group.
Judge Long cited prior deposition testimony in separate New York litigation indicating Case had discussed content created for allegedly defamatory websites at Nathan’s direction. That testimony, the judge found, could be relevant to Ghost’s effort to challenge sworn statements made by Wilson and others.
Background: the dispute over “The Deb”
Ghost, along with fellow producers Gregor Cameron and Vince Holden, filed a defamation lawsuit against Wilson in Los Angeles Superior Court in July 2024. The producers say Wilson told her roughly 11 million Instagram followers that they had engaged in theft, bullying and sexual misconduct in connection with the production of “The Deb,” Wilson’s directorial debut.
Wilson has moved to dismiss portions of the claims under the state’s anti‑SLAPP statute, which protects speech on matters of public interest and can stay discovery while a dismissal motion is resolved. Ghost argued she needed limited discovery to show that statements in Wilson’s sworn declaration were false and to oppose the dismissal motion.
What’s allowed and what was blocked
The judge rejected Ghost’s requests to depose Wilson and Nathan directly, saying those depositions were not warranted at this stage. But by authorizing a deposition of Katie Case, the court opened a potential avenue for evidence about who authored or coordinated the allegedly defamatory online content.
Wilson’s attorneys argued that the discovery hold should protect her from burdensome discovery and should only be lifted for good cause, not merely to test the truth of a sworn declaration. Wilson has stated under oath that she did not create or direct the creation of the allegedly defamatory websites and does not know who did.
Ongoing litigation and appeal
Wilson has also filed a countersuit accusing the producers of other wrongdoing related to the film’s finances. A prior ruling in November 2024 denied Wilson’s dismissal request in the producers’ underlying case; that decision is now on appeal. The limited discovery order is likely to shape next steps as both sides continue to litigate in and out of court.
Image Referance: https://mynewsla.com/business/2026/01/09/the-deb-producer-granted-some-discovery-in-fighting-rebel-wilson-motion/