Jake Paul Answers Eddie Hearn’s Lawsuit, Files Countersuit Against Promoter

2:59 PM PT — Eddie Hearn‘s legal professional, Frank Salzano, launched a press release to TMZ Sports activities … saying Jake‘s declare that his feedback had been protected beneath New York’s Anti-SLAPP legal guidelines — which defend defendants from lawsuits meant to hinder their freedom of speech — “fails for several reasons.”

“The most glaring reason is that Anti-SLAPP laws were primarily enacted to protect against plaintiffs who filed claims seeking to suppress freedom of speech, these statutes were not enacted to protect maliciously false or defamatory statements – which Paul’s remarks clearly constitute,” the assertion learn.

Salzano mentioned the plan is to dismiss the “meritless” declare and proceed with Hearn’s defamation case.

Jake Paul is not taking his battle with Eddie Hearn laying down … ‘trigger two years after the British promoter filed a $100 million defamation lawsuit towards the Drawback Baby, the 27-year-old is firing again along with his personal authorized motion towards Hearn.

Within the docs, obtained by TMZ Sports activities, Jake argues Eddie’s go well with is nothing greater than an try to silence his proper to free speech utilizing intimidation techniques to close Paul up.

Jake says Eddie’s lawsuit is straight BS, and he should not owe the Matchroom Boxing promoter a purple cent. As a substitute, Paul claims he is the one who’s deserving of a fats cost … arguing within the docs he needs to be entitled to compensatory and punitive damages, along with the price of authorized charges.

In fact, the disagreement goes again to The Amanda Serrano vs. Katie Taylor battle in April 2022 … a scrap KT gained by cut up choice.

Jake, via Most Invaluable Promotions, reps Amanda … whereas Katie is Eddie’s fighter.

After the battle, Hearn took challenge with Paul claiming the judges had been paid off, finally writing in his lawsuit that Jake “made outrageously false and baseless allegations.”

As for Paul, he states, “the defamation claim is barred because the challenged statements were expressions of opinion, hyperbole, and/or humor.”

Paul additionally states his feedback didn’t trigger “actual harm or damage” … and “any claimed damages are vague, uncertain, imaginary and/or speculative.”

Jake does not dispute stating his opinion, however our sources are adamant that after Eddie’s staff reached out, Paul obliged their request to take away the interview the place he made the assertion.

Nonetheless, Hearn went ahead with the lawsuit.

Backside line … folks acquainted with Jake’s considering are adamant he will not be intimidated into shutting up, and is full steam forward along with his countersuit.

Spherical 2. Ding, ding, ding!