New York Influencers Emily Gellis and Tanya Zuckerbrot are at warfare once more.
Zuckerbrot is suing Gellis for greater than $250,000 for defamation, in response to a brand new court docket submitting seen by Web page Six.
Gellis has lengthy accused the dietician of creating her devoted followers sick, prompting Zuckerbrot to apologize to her clients.
Whereas, in flip, Zuckerbrot alleged that Gellis tried to destroy her health firm by harassing her with a marketing campaign of lies about her enterprise on Instagram, in response to a 2020 New York Supreme Courtroom lawsuit. The primary defamation lawsuit — over which Gellis filed a countersuit — continues to be pending.
Now, Zuckerbrot — whose “eat carbs … work out much less” program boasts movie star followers equivalent to Megyn Kelly — is suing Gellis a second time.
In a brand new court docket submitting, seen by Web page Six, Zuckerbrot alleges: “Gellis’s social media misconduct has precipitated Zuckerbrot to undergo reputational harm and devastating emotional misery. Zuckerbrot fears for her security and the security of her household primarily based on Gellis’s unhinged, malicious, and harassing Instagram posts.”
Zuckerbrot’s present lawsuit, filed in New York Supreme Courtroom on March 3, additionally alleges that claims made by Gellis on-line — together with that Zuckerbrot and her supporters have been focusing on her and her unborn child daughter whereas she was closely pregnant — are false.
In September 2021, Gellis mentioned on Instagram that Zuckerbrot “is behind the hate accounts that bully me relentlessly.”
Zuckerbot asserts in her lawsuit that this assertion was unfaithful, writing, “Gellis is accusing Zuckerbrot of paying folks to go after Gellis, a legal exercise, thus it’s a false and defamatory assertion.”
The court docket submitting additionally provides that in April 2021, “Gellis falsely accused Zuckerbrot of an extreme ingesting behavior, and posted a video to her Instagram Story, which mentioned ‘[g]et a grip. Go chug the wine. I do know you hit the bottle reside.’ Actually, Zuckerbrot doesn’t have an extreme ingesting drawback. Accordingly, it is a false and defamatory assertion.”
In line with court docket papers, Gellis defamed Zuckerbot in a separate occasion in April when “Gellis falsely accused Zuckerbrot of bullying Gellis’ unborn child, and an eight-month pregnant lady. Particularly, Gellis posted on her Instagram Story, ‘Hello Tanya- I do know you don’t need articles working about the way you bully an 8 month pregnant lady. No quantity of $$$$$ will EVER suffice to clear your title from bullying a f—ing child. So that is my final warning- again the f—okay off of me. You need a f—ing warfare with me – hold my f—ing household out of it.’ There is no such thing as a proof that Zuckerbrot bullied Gellis’ unborn child, nor Gellis whereas she was pregnant. Neither is there proof that Zuckerbrot desires a ‘warfare’ with Gellis. Accordingly, it is a false and defamatory assertion.”
It continued that once more in April: “Gellis posted a sonogram picture to her Instagram story, and said ‘Tanya do you be ok with your self at night time? Bullying this child? That make you’re feeling good? You could really feel nice.’ There is no such thing as a proof that Zuckerbrot bullied Gellis’ unborn child. Accordingly, it is a false and defamatory assertion.”
Gellis declined to remark to Web page Six, however she broke down in tears as she spoke out concerning the new submitting Friday.
She instructed her 182,000 Instagram followers: “After virtually 2 years they nonetheless don’t perceive that they won’t intimidate me.
“What number of lawsuits do you assume she is going to file in opposition to me in an try to get me to vanish?
“The primary one wasn’t sufficient, let’s do MORE. Joyful Friday…I’ll spare you the 54 web page criticism, however she would really like an extra $250,000.”
Zuckerbrot’s lawyer Steven Harfenist instructed Web page Six: “We’ve got filed this second motion in opposition to Ms. Gellis for persevering with to make false defamatory statements in opposition to Ms. Zuckerbrot. In contrast to the primary motion, the claims on this case are unrelated to Ms. Zuckerbrot’s enterprise however quite directed to her character and private life.
“These false private assaults, made via social media, can’t be left with no authorized response. To take action can be to condone the usage of social media as a software to trigger hurt to others by spewing lies and false feedback into the web. We stay up for proving that Ms. Gellis is nothing greater than a pathological liar who fabricates claims in opposition to Ms. Zuckerbrot for her personal private achieve.”