Ariana Madix, Raquel Leviss. Jesse Grant/Getty Images for iHeartRadio
Ariana Madix’s attorneys have responded to Rachel “Raquel” Leviss’ revenge porn lawsuit.
According to court documents obtained by Us Weekly on Monday, April 29, Madix’s legal team argued that Leviss, 29, was seeking to “punish” and “blame Ms. Madix for the negative reaction [she] received as a result of her affair” with Tom Sandoval.
The filing alleged that Leviss’ lawsuit is “an abuse of the legal process” and that her allegations be stricken and Madix, 38, be rewarded her attorneys’ fees.
“[Leviss] does not seek to vindicate any cognizable rights but to punish Ms. Madix, and deter others, from exercising their constitutionally protected right of free speech.”
Leaving their mark on reality TV. Tom Sandoval and Ariana Madix found themselves at the center of drama after joining Bravo’s Vanderpump Rules. Viewers were initially introduced to Sandoval’s love life through his tumultuous relationship with Kristen Doute. Amid their on-and-off relationship, the former couple’s future was called into question when Madix came to work […]
Leviss filed the lawsuit in February, accusing Sandoval, 40, and Madix, who dated for nearly a decade, of eavesdropping, revenge porn and invasion of privacy. Madix and Sandoval broke up in March 2023 after Madix learned that Leviss and Sandoval were having an affair behind her back. Madix discovered explicit videos of Leviss on Sandoval’s phone while the two were dating. The drama between the trio has since played out on Vanderpump Rules.
Madix’s attorneys argued that she learned of Sandoval’s affair with Leviss “in the worst possible way” as she found a video of the pair “having phone sex.” Madix was “devastated” and “immediately confronted” Sandoval about the issue and told her friends of the “betrayal,” per the docs. However, Madix claimed she never shared “any of the video footage she found” with anyone but Leviss.
Raquel Leviss, Tom Sandoval, Ariana Madix. Nicole Weingart/Bravo
“In fact, Ms. Madix could not have shared such footage because Mr. Sandoval deleted it from her phone within minutes of Ms. Madix confronting him — a fact Ms. Madix stated in writing 33 minutes after sending the videos to [Leviss],” the docs alleged.
In addition to Madix responding to Leviss’ lawsuit, Sandoval and his legal team also requested that the suit against him be dismissed or amended.
Bryan Freedman and Mark Garegos, who represent Leviss, responded to Madix’s filing in a statement to Us: Madix’s attorneys argued that she learned of Sandoval’s affair with Leviss “in the worst possible way” as she found a video of the pair “having phone sex.” Madix was “devastated” and “immediately confronted” Sandoval about the issue and told her friends of the “betrayal,” per the docs. However, Madix claimed she never shared “any of the video footage she found” with anyone but Leviss.
According to docs obtained by Us earlier this month, Sandoval’s attorneys argued that the lawsuit “is a thinly veiled attempt to extend [Leviss’] fame and to rebrand herself as the victim” while “denigrating her former friend [Madix] as a ‘scorned woman’ and her former paramour Sandoval as ‘predatory.’”
Leviss’ legal team responded to Sandoval’s filing. “Sandoval’s response in the face of irrefutable evidence that will be presented in court is disturbing,” the attorneys said in a statement to Us. “Leveraging such claims for media attention and perpetuating victim-blaming is not just deplorable but actionable.”
