- Judge Thomas D. Long allows limited discovery for producer Amanda Ghost.
- Ghost seeks evidence to oppose Rebel Wilson’s motion to dismiss under anti-SLAPP.
- Depositions of Katie Case approved; requests to depose Wilson and publicist denied.
- Case stems from alleged defamatory social media statements about the 2024 film “The Deb.”
H2: Judge permits partial discovery in dispute with Rebel Wilson
A Los Angeles judge has granted limited discovery to producer Amanda Ghost in her separate defamation suit against Rebel Wilson, allowing Ghost to gather certain evidence to challenge Wilson’s motion to dismiss. The ruling was issued by Judge Thomas D. Long on Thursday.
H3: What the discovery allows — and what it does not
Judge Long denied Ghost’s request to depose Rebel Wilson and publicist Melissa Nathan. However, he approved a narrower request: Ghost’s lawyers may depose Katie Case, a former employee of Nathan and the Agency Group. Case previously testified in related New York litigation about allegedly defamatory websites.
Ghost argued the limited discovery is necessary to test statements in sworn declarations by Wilson denying involvement in the allegedly defamatory posts. Wilson’s lawyers countered that California’s anti-SLAPP law automatically stays discovery while a dismissal motion is pending, and that the stay should only be lifted for good cause.
H4: Background — how the dispute started
The dispute traces back to July 2024, when producers Amanda Ghost, Gregor Cameron and Vince Holden sued Rebel Wilson in Los Angeles Superior Court, claiming the actress told her roughly 11 million Instagram followers that the producers engaged in theft, bullying and sexual misconduct. “The Deb,” released in 2024, was Wilson’s directorial debut.
Ghost later filed a separate individual defamation action against Wilson. In response, Wilson moved to dismiss on First Amendment and anti-SLAPP grounds. Ghost then sought limited discovery to oppose that dismissal motion, saying it would expose whether Wilson’s sworn denials about the social media posts were truthful.
H3: Countersuit and other procedural posture
Wilson has filed a countersuit in the original underlying case, accusing the producers of theft, bullying and sexual misconduct and alleging they inflated the film’s budget and misappropriated funds. In November 2024, the judge denied Wilson’s motion to dismiss the producers’ underlying complaint; that ruling is currently under appeal.
Both sides repeatedly invoke California’s anti-SLAPP statute. Wilson’s team argues the law protects speech and imposes a discovery stay to spare defendants from burdensome litigation while a dismissal motion is pending. Ghost argues selective, narrowly tailored discovery is warranted to contest Wilson’s sworn statements.
H5: What to watch next
The immediate next step is the deposition of Katie Case, which could yield testimony about how content for the allegedly defamatory websites was created. The outcome of that testimony may affect Ghost’s ability to oppose Wilson’s anti-SLAPP motion and shape the broader litigation timeline.
For now, the case remains active on multiple fronts: the underlying producers’ suit, Ghost’s separate action, Wilson’s anti-SLAPP motions and the ongoing appeal of last fall’s dismissal denial.
Image Referance: https://mynewsla.com/business/2026/01/09/the-deb-producer-granted-some-discovery-in-fighting-rebel-wilson-motion/
