Top Tweets for #KatherineCase
THE SELF-EXPLANATORY VIDEO ABOUT ⬇️
#StephanieJones #Jonesworks #KatherineCase #JonesworksvsCase #JonesvsAbel
So... now we know why #Jonesworks v. #KatherineCase was settled.
#StephanieJones contend that newly obtained communications, payment records, notes, and testimony show Nathan directed, edited, and funded defamatory websites targeting #Jones while repeatedly denying involvement under oath.
URL (MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT MELISSA NATHAN FOR DISCOVERY MISCONDUCT): ⬇️
https://t.co/DDc3O1Zg5l
#StephanieJones #Jonesworks #JonesvsAbel #JonesworksvsCase
So... now we know why #Jonesworks v. #KatherineCase was settled.
#StephanieJones contend that newly obtained communications, payment records, notes, and testimony show Nathan directed, edited, and funded defamatory websites targeting #Jones while repeatedly denying involvement under oath.
URL (MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT MELISSA NATHAN FOR DISCOVERY MISCONDUCT): ⬇️
https://t.co/DDc3O1Zg5l
#StephanieJones #Jonesworks #JonesvsAbel #JonesworksvsCase
Agreed Order of Dismissal With Prejudice has been entered in the SDNY in Jonesworks LLC v. Katherine Case, Case No. 1:26-cv-07685.
... states the parties, through counsel, “have reached a settlement of all claims asserted by Plaintiff—#Jonesworks against #KatherineCase” in this action.
#Jonesworks #StephanieJones #JonesvsAbel #JonesworksvsCase #LivelyvsBaldoni
#StephanieJones settled the case against #KatherineCase and then Abel seeks confirmation that the court’s general motion-closing order DID NOT terminate her still-unresolved indemnification claim & pending conditional summary judgment motion against non-settling party #Jonesworks.
Cross-claim for indemnification was filed by Abel against #Jonesworks on March 20, 2025.
Reasserted indemnification claim was included again in Abel’s answers to #Lively’s First and Second Amended Complaints.
Conditional summary judgment motion against #Jonesworks was filed by Abel on November 11, 2025.
Bifurcation order on December 23, 2025 required Abel’s third-party claims against #Jonesworks to be tried separately from #Lively’s claims against Abel.
Settlement agreement on May 7, 2026 resolved #Lively’s claims against the “Wayfarer Parties.”
Non-party status applied to #Jonesworks, which was not a party to the settlement agreement.
Release carve-out expressly excluded #Jonesworks & #StephanieJones from the settling parties’ mutual releases.
... therefore
This clarification request 👇 argues that because #Jonesworks was not part of the stipulation & was excluded from releases, Abel’s summary judgment motion should remain pending on her third-party claim.
URL (SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT OF MAY 7, 2026 RESOLVING LIVELY'S CLAIMS AGAINST THE WAYFARER PARTIES): ⬇️
https://t.co/rBNvdf08h6
#Jonesworks #StephanieJones #BlakeLively #LivelyvsBaldoni #JonesvsAbel #JonesworksvsCase
Agreed Order of Dismissal With Prejudice has been entered in the SDNY in Jonesworks LLC v. Katherine Case, Case No. 1:26-cv-07685.
... states the parties, through counsel, “have reached a settlement of all claims asserted by Plaintiff—#Jonesworks against #KatherineCase” in this action.
#Jonesworks #StephanieJones #JonesvsAbel #JonesworksvsCase #LivelyvsBaldoni
Agreed Order of Dismissal With Prejudice has been entered in the SDNY in Jonesworks LLC v. Katherine Case, Case No. 1:26-cv-07685.
... states the parties, through counsel, “have reached a settlement of all claims asserted by Plaintiff—#Jonesworks against #KatherineCase” in this action.
#Jonesworks #StephanieJones #JonesvsAbel #JonesworksvsCase #LivelyvsBaldoni
So, #Jonesworks vs. #KatherineCase has been deemed related to #Jones vs. #Abel and landed in Judge Liman’s orbit—before being handed off to Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave, his right hand, who also handled settlement negotiations in the #BlakeLively vs. #Wayfarer matter.
Hmmm... Judge Liman has apparently had enough of the smear-machine litigation genre for one docket. 👨🏼⚖️👨🏼⚖️
#Jonesworks #StephanieJones #JonesworksvsCase #BlakeLively #LivelyvsBaldoni #JonesvsAbel
So, #Jonesworks vs. #KatherineCase has been deemed related to #Jones vs. #Abel and landed in Judge Liman’s orbit—before being handed off to Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave, his right hand, who also handled settlement negotiations in the #BlakeLively vs. #Wayfarer matter.
Hmmm... Judge Liman has apparently had enough of the smear-machine litigation genre for one docket. 👨🏼⚖️👨🏼⚖️
#Jonesworks #StephanieJones #JonesworksvsCase #BlakeLively #LivelyvsBaldoni #JonesvsAbel
#KatherineCase asked to remove Jonesworks LLC’s New York Supreme Court action to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
#KatherineCase related-case statement connects the newly filed action against her with the pending #Jones and #Jonesworks litigation.
Related-case filing: links it to an earlier case, Stephanie Jones, Jonesworks LLC v. Jennifer Abel, Melissa Nathan, Justin Baldoni, Wayfarer Studios, LLC, John Does 1-10 (25-cv-779).
Trial schedule sets the earlier Jones/Jonesworks case for trial in February 2027.
Core allegations (earlier case) center on claims that Abel and Nathan conspired to steal Jones/Jonesworks clients, that Abel retained confidential business information, and that Nathan and Abel disparaged Jones/Jonesworks.
Business Insider angle (earlier case) includes allegations that Nathan and Abel solicited statements for a “Business Insider” story and for websites about Jones and Jonesworks.
Key ruling highlights a March 26, 2026 decision by Judge Liman denying Jones’ motion to amend the complaint as critical to the earlier case.
Denied defendant addition reflects Judge Liman’s denial of adding/naming Nathan as a “Doe” defendant in a defamation claim.
Denied new claim reflects Judge Liman’s denial of adding a tortious interference with prospective business relations claim against Nathan.
Employment transition (new case) alleges Case left Jonesworks and then worked for Nathan and The Agency Group, where Nathan was CEO.
Defamation focus (new case) asserts that, although framed as breach of contract, the new case largely concerns alleged defamatory statements by Case published in the referenced “Business Insider” article and in the referenced websites.
Overlap with earlier themes ties the new case’s defamation allegations to the same article and websites already at issue in the pending case.
➜ Alleges Case took clients and/or used confidential materials from her Jonesworks employment to divert clients.
➜ Links the alleged client diversion by Case to the same time period when Jones/Jonesworks contends Abel and Nathan were doing similar conduct in the original action.
Well... Judge Liman will be so pleased… 🤓🤓
URL (CASE'S NOTICE OF REMOVAL): ⬇️
https://t.co/5NwndlAm1x
URL (CASE'S STATEMENT OF RELATEDNESS): ⬇️
https://t.co/J1x7A18OcC
#BlakeLively #StephanieJones #Jonesworks #LivelyvsBaldoni #JonesvsAbel #JonesworksvsCase
Stephanie Jones to Katherine Case: Give Me the Documents—or I’ll Sue You.
On October 15, 2025 #Jonesworks threatened that #KatherineCase might be named as a defendant in an amended complaint, and suggested that cooperation could avoid that outcome. 🤔🤔
… “she remains potentially subject to serious charges of spoliation based on her under oath testimony, and may be subject to being named as a defendant in any amended complaint that Jonesworks may file as a now-identified Doe defendant or otherwise.”
“We therefore write in the spirit of cooperation to avoid Court intervention on this matter and to avoid the need to formally name Ms. Case in a lawsuit.”
What documents #StephanieJones requested. 👇🏽
#BlakeLively #StephanieJones #Jonesworks #LivelyvsBaldoni #JonesvsAbel #JonesworksvsCase
Jonesworks’ Complaint is every bit as broad—and just as conspicuously devoid of specifics—as #BlakeLively’s #Vanzan Complaint.
... and the real reason why #StephanieJones filed this 🤔🤔
Jonesworks’ complaint relies on broad allegations with few specific facts tying #KatherineCase (KC) to identifiable acts, recipients, dates, or causation, and because some claims may face enforceability and proof challenges under New York law.
Lack of specific “who/what/when” details:
— #Jonesworks alleges KC used confidential information, disparaged #Jonesworks, and tried to poach clients, but she provides few concrete details such as which clients, what specific statements, what exact confidential documents, or what dates/communications beyond general time references like “Spring of 2024.”
— #Jonesworks references communications over Signal and says her efforts were “ultimately unsuccessful” at covering tracks, but it does not identify preserved messages, senders/recipients, or content within the pleading itself.
Limited detail connecting alleged acts to measurable damages:
— #Jonesworks alleges “reputational damage” and “lost client accounts,” but does not specify which accounts were lost, when, or how those losses were proximately caused by KC's conduct rather than other market factors or independent client decisions.
Two-year non-solicitation:
— #Jonesworks asserts KC “worked to persuade” clients and was “successful,” but it does not identify the specific client relationships and conduct that constitute solicitation.
“No publication” clause not time-limited:
— Really… a lifelong gag on discussing workplace experiences… I don’t think so. 🤦🏽♂️🤦🏽♂️
Non-disparagement tied to communications with media:
— #Jonesworks does not quote any specific disparaging statement allegedly made by KC, which can make breach harder to prove and can raise disputes over whether statements were opinion, substantially true, or outside the clause’s scope.
Heavy reliance on the Business Insider sourcing:
— #Jonesworks alleges KC provided confidential client lists/communications to a Business Insider author and that the article contained internal stories “that could only have come” from a former employee like KC… multiple sources could have provided similar information, and #Jonesworks does not identify exactly what content in the article is traceable to KC versus other sources.
Looking at the attached pics, quite a few #Jonesworks employees seem to have their own stories to tell about what it was really like working there. Clearly, the workplace culture left a laaasting impression.
☑️ Discrimination & harassment:
— Racism and diversity-related issues were cited as reasons for leaving and as workplace experiences.
— Reports of harassment linked to departures and after employees left.
☑️Abusive & toxic work environment:
— Abuse and toxic workplace dynamics were repeatedly referenced.
— Verbal abuse was specifically mentioned.
☑️ Firings, retaliation & invasive behaviour
— Employees described being fired without warning or for no reason.
— Allegations of retaliation after termination, including: Being sent legal letters after being fired. False accusations and being harassed after leaving.
— A severe incident was described involving alleged invasive monitoring, including going through an employee’s email and seeking phone/text records.
☑️ Health & personal-life impacts
— Mental health impacts and “personal issues” were cited as part of the work experience.
— Health scares/issues were mentioned in connection with the workplace.
— Pressure involving major personal disruption, including being forced to move across the country.
☑️ Compensation & payment issues
— Lack of pay and demotion were mentioned as workplace problems.
— A recruiter allegedly was never paid.
☑️ Client/account-related workplace stress
— Employees referenced client issues and difficult client-team interactions connected to the work environment.
URL (PROBLEMS EMPLOYEES EXPERIENCED WORKING FOR JONESWORKS): ⬇️
https://t.co/bBiWNteseu
#BlakeLively #StephanieJones #Jonesworks #LivelyvsBaldoni #JonesvsAbel #JonesworksvsCase
#KatherineCase asked to remove Jonesworks LLC’s New York Supreme Court action to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
#KatherineCase related-case statement connects the newly filed action against her with the pending #Jones and #Jonesworks litigation.
Related-case filing: links it to an earlier case, Stephanie Jones, Jonesworks LLC v. Jennifer Abel, Melissa Nathan, Justin Baldoni, Wayfarer Studios, LLC, John Does 1-10 (25-cv-779).
Trial schedule sets the earlier Jones/Jonesworks case for trial in February 2027.
Core allegations (earlier case) center on claims that Abel and Nathan conspired to steal Jones/Jonesworks clients, that Abel retained confidential business information, and that Nathan and Abel disparaged Jones/Jonesworks.
Business Insider angle (earlier case) includes allegations that Nathan and Abel solicited statements for a “Business Insider” story and for websites about Jones and Jonesworks.
Key ruling highlights a March 26, 2026 decision by Judge Liman denying Jones’ motion to amend the complaint as critical to the earlier case.
Denied defendant addition reflects Judge Liman’s denial of adding/naming Nathan as a “Doe” defendant in a defamation claim.
Denied new claim reflects Judge Liman’s denial of adding a tortious interference with prospective business relations claim against Nathan.
Employment transition (new case) alleges Case left Jonesworks and then worked for Nathan and The Agency Group, where Nathan was CEO.
Defamation focus (new case) asserts that, although framed as breach of contract, the new case largely concerns alleged defamatory statements by Case published in the referenced “Business Insider” article and in the referenced websites.
Overlap with earlier themes ties the new case’s defamation allegations to the same article and websites already at issue in the pending case.
➜ Alleges Case took clients and/or used confidential materials from her Jonesworks employment to divert clients.
➜ Links the alleged client diversion by Case to the same time period when Jones/Jonesworks contends Abel and Nathan were doing similar conduct in the original action.
Well... Judge Liman will be so pleased… 🤓🤓
URL (CASE'S NOTICE OF REMOVAL): ⬇️
https://t.co/5NwndlAm1x
URL (CASE'S STATEMENT OF RELATEDNESS): ⬇️
https://t.co/J1x7A18OcC
#BlakeLively #StephanieJones #Jonesworks #LivelyvsBaldoni #JonesvsAbel #JonesworksvsCase
This 👇🏽 totally unrelated 🤓🤓
Wayfarer filed the Motion to Dismiss the Eighth Cause of Action for Defamation and the "John Does" Defendants on August 18. Then #StephanieJones filed the summons to #KatherineCase on August 27 and the complaint on September 3, shortly after responding to Wayfarer's Motion to Dismiss. But obviously those events are entirely unrelated… what a remarkable coincidence. 😉😉
#Jonesworks
Stephanie Jones filed a New York Supreme Court lawsuit against former employee Katherine Case.
Plaintiff—Jonesworks LLC (SJ) sues former employee #KatherineCase (KC) in New York Supreme Court for allegedly breaching her employment agreement by disclosing confidential information, assisting a media “hit piece,” disparaging the firm, and soliciting clients after leaving for a competitor.
1️⃣ What #Jones Says Happened
SJ frames KC as a former senior employee who had close access to the firm’s and clients’ sensitive information and then allegedly weaponised that access after departing. SJ alleges she “began using the confidential information she obtained while working at #Jonesworks to publicly disparage #Jonesworks and #StephanieJones, and to attempt to steal clients away from #Jonesworks.”
SJ ties nearly every factual allegation to a written employment contract and then pleads two causes of action:
— Count 1: Breach of Contract (violations of multiple restrictive provisions).
— Count 2: Unfair Competition (misappropriation/unauthorised use of proprietary information to compete).
2️⃣ Context & Timeline (as pled by SJ)
#Jonesworks positions itself as “a highly respected public relations firm” founded and “solely owned by #StephanieJones” 🥳🥳🥳🥳
Employment & separation timeline:
— KC was hired “in or around September of 2021” as “Director of Strategic Communications and Crisis Management.”
— She resigned effective “March 30, 2022.”
— After leaving, she allegedly joined “The Agency Group (‘TAG’)—another PR firm in direct competition with Jonesworks.”
What KC allegedly agreed to: #Jonesworks alleges the parties executed:
— A “Non-Disclosure and Intellectual Property Rights and Non-Competition Agreement (the ‘Employment Agreement’)” and
— An “offer letter” (the “Offer Letter”).
Key restrictions in the Employment Agreement:
1) Confidentiality (survives termination): #Jonesworks pleads that KC agreed to keep confidential “any and all of Jonesworks’ proprietary information, including strategies, plans, financial information, and information pertaining to Jonesworks’ clients.” SJ also pleads: obligations “continue throughout [Case’s] employment…and remain in effect after the termination of [Case’s] employment.”
2) No Publication Provision (not time-limited): #Jonesworks pleads the contract barred her from “preparing or assisting any person or entity in the preparation of any books, articles, radio broadcasts, electronic communications, television or motion picture productions of other creations…concerning [Jonesworks]…or clients…” without “express authorization.” It emphasizes: “This provision is not restricted by time.”
3) Non-disparagement (media-focused): #Jonesworks quotes a clause prohibiting communications with “any reporter, author, producer or any similar person or entity, the press or other media” that “criticize, ridicule or make any statement that disparages or is detrimental to [Jonesworks]” and related parties.
4) Non-solicitation (two years post-termination): #Jonesworks pleads a two-year restriction barring KC from:
— “soliciting business from Jonesworks’ clients,”
— “providing services to Jonesworks’ clients,” or
— “persuading any Jonesworks client to cease doing business or reduce the amount of business the client does with Jonesworks.”
Because this restriction is limited to “two years following the termination,” it would run (on the pleadings’ dates) roughly from March 30, 2022 to March 30, 2024.
3️⃣ Factual Allegations of Misconduct
Access to confidential information while employed: #Jonesworks pleads that KC “worked on the accounts of some of Jonesworks’ most highprofile clients” and “was entrusted with confidential client information as part of her day-to-day responsibilities.”
Post-employment competitive conduct & alleged misuse: #Jonesworks alleges that at TAG, KC “began using the confidential information she obtained while at Jonesworks to undercut Jonesworks’ business by stealing Jonesworks’ clients, disparaging Jonesworks in the media… and gaining an unfair competitive business advantage.”
The Business Insider “hit piece” narrative: #Jonesworks pleads a focused story: KC allegedly “worked to place a hit piece about Jonesworks in Business Insider,” was “interviewed,” and “provided confidential information” including “confidential client lists and client communications.”
Alleged motive: #Jonesworks pleads an intent-to-poach theory: KC allegedly collaborated because she believed the article “would help persuade certain Jonesworks clients to move their business to a competitor PR firm for whom Case was working.”
Additional alleged conduct: Beyond Business Insider, #Jonesworks alleges: “Case wrote false copy for statements about Jonesworks and Stephanie Jones that Case believed would be disseminated publicly.”
Alleged consciousness of wrongdoing (Signal): #Jonesworks includes an allegation of concealment: communications “occurred in large part over…‘Signal,’ designed to auto-delete…to prevent later discovery of the paper trail tying Case to these actions.”
4️⃣ Causes of Action
(A) Count 1 — Breach of Contract
#Jonesworks pleads:
— Existence of a “valid and enforceable contract.”
— Specific obligations (confidentiality; no-publication; non-disparagement; non-solicitation).
— Specific breaches, including: “failing to maintain the confidentiality,” “using confidential information to solicit…business,” “publishing disparaging statements,” and “directly assisting in the preparation of articles.”
(B) Count 2 — Unfair Competition
#Jonesworks pleads that KC had access to “sensitive trade secrets and confidential information,” used it “in an effort to steal clients,” and engaged in “unauthorized use of Jonesworks’ proprietary information.” She further characterizes the conduct as “willful and egregious.”
5️⃣ Remedies Sought
Relief requested: #Jonesworks seeks
— “Monetary damages,”
— “Reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs…as allowed by law,”
— “Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest,” and
— other relief the Court deems proper.
Jury demand: “Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on all issues so triable.”
URL (JONESWORKS’ LLC COMPLAINT): ⬇️
https://t.co/GyTreFtlLu
URL (SUMMONS WITH NOTICE): ⬇️
https://t.co/8WiDlSkxMI
#BlakeLively #StephanieJones #Jonesworks #LivelyvsBaldoni #JonesvsAbel #JonesworksvsCase
![schatow's tweet photo. Stephanie Jones filed a New York Supreme Court lawsuit against former employee Katherine Case.
Plaintiff—Jonesworks LLC (SJ) sues former employee #KatherineCase (KC) in New York Supreme Court for allegedly breaching her employment agreement by disclosing confidential information, assisting a media “hit piece,” disparaging the firm, and soliciting clients after leaving for a competitor.
1️⃣ What #Jones Says Happened
SJ frames KC as a former senior employee who had close access to the firm’s and clients’ sensitive information and then allegedly weaponised that access after departing. SJ alleges she “began using the confidential information she obtained while working at #Jonesworks to publicly disparage #Jonesworks and #StephanieJones, and to attempt to steal clients away from #Jonesworks.”
SJ ties nearly every factual allegation to a written employment contract and then pleads two causes of action:
— Count 1: Breach of Contract (violations of multiple restrictive provisions).
— Count 2: Unfair Competition (misappropriation/unauthorised use of proprietary information to compete).
2️⃣ Context & Timeline (as pled by SJ)
#Jonesworks positions itself as “a highly respected public relations firm” founded and “solely owned by #StephanieJones” 🥳🥳🥳🥳
Employment & separation timeline:
— KC was hired “in or around September of 2021” as “Director of Strategic Communications and Crisis Management.”
— She resigned effective “March 30, 2022.”
— After leaving, she allegedly joined “The Agency Group (‘TAG’)—another PR firm in direct competition with Jonesworks.”
What KC allegedly agreed to: #Jonesworks alleges the parties executed:
— A “Non-Disclosure and Intellectual Property Rights and Non-Competition Agreement (the ‘Employment Agreement’)” and
— An “offer letter” (the “Offer Letter”).
Key restrictions in the Employment Agreement:
1) Confidentiality (survives termination): #Jonesworks pleads that KC agreed to keep confidential “any and all of Jonesworks’ proprietary information, including strategies, plans, financial information, and information pertaining to Jonesworks’ clients.” SJ also pleads: obligations “continue throughout [Case’s] employment…and remain in effect after the termination of [Case’s] employment.”
2) No Publication Provision (not time-limited): #Jonesworks pleads the contract barred her from “preparing or assisting any person or entity in the preparation of any books, articles, radio broadcasts, electronic communications, television or motion picture productions of other creations…concerning [Jonesworks]…or clients…” without “express authorization.” It emphasizes: “This provision is not restricted by time.”
3) Non-disparagement (media-focused): #Jonesworks quotes a clause prohibiting communications with “any reporter, author, producer or any similar person or entity, the press or other media” that “criticize, ridicule or make any statement that disparages or is detrimental to [Jonesworks]” and related parties.
4) Non-solicitation (two years post-termination): #Jonesworks pleads a two-year restriction barring KC from:
— “soliciting business from Jonesworks’ clients,”
— “providing services to Jonesworks’ clients,” or
— “persuading any Jonesworks client to cease doing business or reduce the amount of business the client does with Jonesworks.”
Because this restriction is limited to “two years following the termination,” it would run (on the pleadings’ dates) roughly from March 30, 2022 to March 30, 2024.
3️⃣ Factual Allegations of Misconduct
Access to confidential information while employed: #Jonesworks pleads that KC “worked on the accounts of some of Jonesworks’ most highprofile clients” and “was entrusted with confidential client information as part of her day-to-day responsibilities.”
Post-employment competitive conduct & alleged misuse: #Jonesworks alleges that at TAG, KC “began using the confidential information she obtained while at Jonesworks to undercut Jonesworks’ business by stealing Jonesworks’ clients, disparaging Jonesworks in the media… and gaining an unfair competitive business advantage.”
The Business Insider “hit piece” narrative: #Jonesworks pleads a focused story: KC allegedly “worked to place a hit piece about Jonesworks in Business Insider,” was “interviewed,” and “provided confidential information” including “confidential client lists and client communications.”
Alleged motive: #Jonesworks pleads an intent-to-poach theory: KC allegedly collaborated because she believed the article “would help persuade certain Jonesworks clients to move their business to a competitor PR firm for whom Case was working.”
Additional alleged conduct: Beyond Business Insider, #Jonesworks alleges: “Case wrote false copy for statements about Jonesworks and Stephanie Jones that Case believed would be disseminated publicly.”
Alleged consciousness of wrongdoing (Signal): #Jonesworks includes an allegation of concealment: communications “occurred in large part over…‘Signal,’ designed to auto-delete…to prevent later discovery of the paper trail tying Case to these actions.”
4️⃣ Causes of Action
(A) Count 1 — Breach of Contract
#Jonesworks pleads:
— Existence of a “valid and enforceable contract.”
— Specific obligations (confidentiality; no-publication; non-disparagement; non-solicitation).
— Specific breaches, including: “failing to maintain the confidentiality,” “using confidential information to solicit…business,” “publishing disparaging statements,” and “directly assisting in the preparation of articles.”
(B) Count 2 — Unfair Competition
#Jonesworks pleads that KC had access to “sensitive trade secrets and confidential information,” used it “in an effort to steal clients,” and engaged in “unauthorized use of Jonesworks’ proprietary information.” She further characterizes the conduct as “willful and egregious.”
5️⃣ Remedies Sought
Relief requested: #Jonesworks seeks
— “Monetary damages,”
— “Reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs…as allowed by law,”
— “Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest,” and
— other relief the Court deems proper.
Jury demand: “Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on all issues so triable.”
URL (JONESWORKS’ LLC COMPLAINT): ⬇️
https://t.co/GyTreFtlLu
URL (SUMMONS WITH NOTICE): ⬇️
https://t.co/8WiDlSkxMI
#BlakeLively #StephanieJones #Jonesworks #LivelyvsBaldoni #JonesvsAbel #JonesworksvsCase](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HR1hhN7aUAAKLHq.jpg)
![schatow's tweet photo. Stephanie Jones filed a New York Supreme Court lawsuit against former employee Katherine Case.
Plaintiff—Jonesworks LLC (SJ) sues former employee #KatherineCase (KC) in New York Supreme Court for allegedly breaching her employment agreement by disclosing confidential information, assisting a media “hit piece,” disparaging the firm, and soliciting clients after leaving for a competitor.
1️⃣ What #Jones Says Happened
SJ frames KC as a former senior employee who had close access to the firm’s and clients’ sensitive information and then allegedly weaponised that access after departing. SJ alleges she “began using the confidential information she obtained while working at #Jonesworks to publicly disparage #Jonesworks and #StephanieJones, and to attempt to steal clients away from #Jonesworks.”
SJ ties nearly every factual allegation to a written employment contract and then pleads two causes of action:
— Count 1: Breach of Contract (violations of multiple restrictive provisions).
— Count 2: Unfair Competition (misappropriation/unauthorised use of proprietary information to compete).
2️⃣ Context & Timeline (as pled by SJ)
#Jonesworks positions itself as “a highly respected public relations firm” founded and “solely owned by #StephanieJones” 🥳🥳🥳🥳
Employment & separation timeline:
— KC was hired “in or around September of 2021” as “Director of Strategic Communications and Crisis Management.”
— She resigned effective “March 30, 2022.”
— After leaving, she allegedly joined “The Agency Group (‘TAG’)—another PR firm in direct competition with Jonesworks.”
What KC allegedly agreed to: #Jonesworks alleges the parties executed:
— A “Non-Disclosure and Intellectual Property Rights and Non-Competition Agreement (the ‘Employment Agreement’)” and
— An “offer letter” (the “Offer Letter”).
Key restrictions in the Employment Agreement:
1) Confidentiality (survives termination): #Jonesworks pleads that KC agreed to keep confidential “any and all of Jonesworks’ proprietary information, including strategies, plans, financial information, and information pertaining to Jonesworks’ clients.” SJ also pleads: obligations “continue throughout [Case’s] employment…and remain in effect after the termination of [Case’s] employment.”
2) No Publication Provision (not time-limited): #Jonesworks pleads the contract barred her from “preparing or assisting any person or entity in the preparation of any books, articles, radio broadcasts, electronic communications, television or motion picture productions of other creations…concerning [Jonesworks]…or clients…” without “express authorization.” It emphasizes: “This provision is not restricted by time.”
3) Non-disparagement (media-focused): #Jonesworks quotes a clause prohibiting communications with “any reporter, author, producer or any similar person or entity, the press or other media” that “criticize, ridicule or make any statement that disparages or is detrimental to [Jonesworks]” and related parties.
4) Non-solicitation (two years post-termination): #Jonesworks pleads a two-year restriction barring KC from:
— “soliciting business from Jonesworks’ clients,”
— “providing services to Jonesworks’ clients,” or
— “persuading any Jonesworks client to cease doing business or reduce the amount of business the client does with Jonesworks.”
Because this restriction is limited to “two years following the termination,” it would run (on the pleadings’ dates) roughly from March 30, 2022 to March 30, 2024.
3️⃣ Factual Allegations of Misconduct
Access to confidential information while employed: #Jonesworks pleads that KC “worked on the accounts of some of Jonesworks’ most highprofile clients” and “was entrusted with confidential client information as part of her day-to-day responsibilities.”
Post-employment competitive conduct & alleged misuse: #Jonesworks alleges that at TAG, KC “began using the confidential information she obtained while at Jonesworks to undercut Jonesworks’ business by stealing Jonesworks’ clients, disparaging Jonesworks in the media… and gaining an unfair competitive business advantage.”
The Business Insider “hit piece” narrative: #Jonesworks pleads a focused story: KC allegedly “worked to place a hit piece about Jonesworks in Business Insider,” was “interviewed,” and “provided confidential information” including “confidential client lists and client communications.”
Alleged motive: #Jonesworks pleads an intent-to-poach theory: KC allegedly collaborated because she believed the article “would help persuade certain Jonesworks clients to move their business to a competitor PR firm for whom Case was working.”
Additional alleged conduct: Beyond Business Insider, #Jonesworks alleges: “Case wrote false copy for statements about Jonesworks and Stephanie Jones that Case believed would be disseminated publicly.”
Alleged consciousness of wrongdoing (Signal): #Jonesworks includes an allegation of concealment: communications “occurred in large part over…‘Signal,’ designed to auto-delete…to prevent later discovery of the paper trail tying Case to these actions.”
4️⃣ Causes of Action
(A) Count 1 — Breach of Contract
#Jonesworks pleads:
— Existence of a “valid and enforceable contract.”
— Specific obligations (confidentiality; no-publication; non-disparagement; non-solicitation).
— Specific breaches, including: “failing to maintain the confidentiality,” “using confidential information to solicit…business,” “publishing disparaging statements,” and “directly assisting in the preparation of articles.”
(B) Count 2 — Unfair Competition
#Jonesworks pleads that KC had access to “sensitive trade secrets and confidential information,” used it “in an effort to steal clients,” and engaged in “unauthorized use of Jonesworks’ proprietary information.” She further characterizes the conduct as “willful and egregious.”
5️⃣ Remedies Sought
Relief requested: #Jonesworks seeks
— “Monetary damages,”
— “Reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs…as allowed by law,”
— “Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest,” and
— other relief the Court deems proper.
Jury demand: “Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on all issues so triable.”
URL (JONESWORKS’ LLC COMPLAINT): ⬇️
https://t.co/GyTreFtlLu
URL (SUMMONS WITH NOTICE): ⬇️
https://t.co/8WiDlSkxMI
#BlakeLively #StephanieJones #Jonesworks #LivelyvsBaldoni #JonesvsAbel #JonesworksvsCase](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HR1hhN6bwAECm0c.jpg)
![schatow's tweet photo. Stephanie Jones filed a New York Supreme Court lawsuit against former employee Katherine Case.
Plaintiff—Jonesworks LLC (SJ) sues former employee #KatherineCase (KC) in New York Supreme Court for allegedly breaching her employment agreement by disclosing confidential information, assisting a media “hit piece,” disparaging the firm, and soliciting clients after leaving for a competitor.
1️⃣ What #Jones Says Happened
SJ frames KC as a former senior employee who had close access to the firm’s and clients’ sensitive information and then allegedly weaponised that access after departing. SJ alleges she “began using the confidential information she obtained while working at #Jonesworks to publicly disparage #Jonesworks and #StephanieJones, and to attempt to steal clients away from #Jonesworks.”
SJ ties nearly every factual allegation to a written employment contract and then pleads two causes of action:
— Count 1: Breach of Contract (violations of multiple restrictive provisions).
— Count 2: Unfair Competition (misappropriation/unauthorised use of proprietary information to compete).
2️⃣ Context & Timeline (as pled by SJ)
#Jonesworks positions itself as “a highly respected public relations firm” founded and “solely owned by #StephanieJones” 🥳🥳🥳🥳
Employment & separation timeline:
— KC was hired “in or around September of 2021” as “Director of Strategic Communications and Crisis Management.”
— She resigned effective “March 30, 2022.”
— After leaving, she allegedly joined “The Agency Group (‘TAG’)—another PR firm in direct competition with Jonesworks.”
What KC allegedly agreed to: #Jonesworks alleges the parties executed:
— A “Non-Disclosure and Intellectual Property Rights and Non-Competition Agreement (the ‘Employment Agreement’)” and
— An “offer letter” (the “Offer Letter”).
Key restrictions in the Employment Agreement:
1) Confidentiality (survives termination): #Jonesworks pleads that KC agreed to keep confidential “any and all of Jonesworks’ proprietary information, including strategies, plans, financial information, and information pertaining to Jonesworks’ clients.” SJ also pleads: obligations “continue throughout [Case’s] employment…and remain in effect after the termination of [Case’s] employment.”
2) No Publication Provision (not time-limited): #Jonesworks pleads the contract barred her from “preparing or assisting any person or entity in the preparation of any books, articles, radio broadcasts, electronic communications, television or motion picture productions of other creations…concerning [Jonesworks]…or clients…” without “express authorization.” It emphasizes: “This provision is not restricted by time.”
3) Non-disparagement (media-focused): #Jonesworks quotes a clause prohibiting communications with “any reporter, author, producer or any similar person or entity, the press or other media” that “criticize, ridicule or make any statement that disparages or is detrimental to [Jonesworks]” and related parties.
4) Non-solicitation (two years post-termination): #Jonesworks pleads a two-year restriction barring KC from:
— “soliciting business from Jonesworks’ clients,”
— “providing services to Jonesworks’ clients,” or
— “persuading any Jonesworks client to cease doing business or reduce the amount of business the client does with Jonesworks.”
Because this restriction is limited to “two years following the termination,” it would run (on the pleadings’ dates) roughly from March 30, 2022 to March 30, 2024.
3️⃣ Factual Allegations of Misconduct
Access to confidential information while employed: #Jonesworks pleads that KC “worked on the accounts of some of Jonesworks’ most highprofile clients” and “was entrusted with confidential client information as part of her day-to-day responsibilities.”
Post-employment competitive conduct & alleged misuse: #Jonesworks alleges that at TAG, KC “began using the confidential information she obtained while at Jonesworks to undercut Jonesworks’ business by stealing Jonesworks’ clients, disparaging Jonesworks in the media… and gaining an unfair competitive business advantage.”
The Business Insider “hit piece” narrative: #Jonesworks pleads a focused story: KC allegedly “worked to place a hit piece about Jonesworks in Business Insider,” was “interviewed,” and “provided confidential information” including “confidential client lists and client communications.”
Alleged motive: #Jonesworks pleads an intent-to-poach theory: KC allegedly collaborated because she believed the article “would help persuade certain Jonesworks clients to move their business to a competitor PR firm for whom Case was working.”
Additional alleged conduct: Beyond Business Insider, #Jonesworks alleges: “Case wrote false copy for statements about Jonesworks and Stephanie Jones that Case believed would be disseminated publicly.”
Alleged consciousness of wrongdoing (Signal): #Jonesworks includes an allegation of concealment: communications “occurred in large part over…‘Signal,’ designed to auto-delete…to prevent later discovery of the paper trail tying Case to these actions.”
4️⃣ Causes of Action
(A) Count 1 — Breach of Contract
#Jonesworks pleads:
— Existence of a “valid and enforceable contract.”
— Specific obligations (confidentiality; no-publication; non-disparagement; non-solicitation).
— Specific breaches, including: “failing to maintain the confidentiality,” “using confidential information to solicit…business,” “publishing disparaging statements,” and “directly assisting in the preparation of articles.”
(B) Count 2 — Unfair Competition
#Jonesworks pleads that KC had access to “sensitive trade secrets and confidential information,” used it “in an effort to steal clients,” and engaged in “unauthorized use of Jonesworks’ proprietary information.” She further characterizes the conduct as “willful and egregious.”
5️⃣ Remedies Sought
Relief requested: #Jonesworks seeks
— “Monetary damages,”
— “Reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs…as allowed by law,”
— “Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest,” and
— other relief the Court deems proper.
Jury demand: “Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on all issues so triable.”
URL (JONESWORKS’ LLC COMPLAINT): ⬇️
https://t.co/GyTreFtlLu
URL (SUMMONS WITH NOTICE): ⬇️
https://t.co/8WiDlSkxMI
#BlakeLively #StephanieJones #Jonesworks #LivelyvsBaldoni #JonesvsAbel #JonesworksvsCase](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HR1hhNXWUAwvDnt.jpg)
![schatow's tweet photo. Stephanie Jones filed a New York Supreme Court lawsuit against former employee Katherine Case.
Plaintiff—Jonesworks LLC (SJ) sues former employee #KatherineCase (KC) in New York Supreme Court for allegedly breaching her employment agreement by disclosing confidential information, assisting a media “hit piece,” disparaging the firm, and soliciting clients after leaving for a competitor.
1️⃣ What #Jones Says Happened
SJ frames KC as a former senior employee who had close access to the firm’s and clients’ sensitive information and then allegedly weaponised that access after departing. SJ alleges she “began using the confidential information she obtained while working at #Jonesworks to publicly disparage #Jonesworks and #StephanieJones, and to attempt to steal clients away from #Jonesworks.”
SJ ties nearly every factual allegation to a written employment contract and then pleads two causes of action:
— Count 1: Breach of Contract (violations of multiple restrictive provisions).
— Count 2: Unfair Competition (misappropriation/unauthorised use of proprietary information to compete).
2️⃣ Context & Timeline (as pled by SJ)
#Jonesworks positions itself as “a highly respected public relations firm” founded and “solely owned by #StephanieJones” 🥳🥳🥳🥳
Employment & separation timeline:
— KC was hired “in or around September of 2021” as “Director of Strategic Communications and Crisis Management.”
— She resigned effective “March 30, 2022.”
— After leaving, she allegedly joined “The Agency Group (‘TAG’)—another PR firm in direct competition with Jonesworks.”
What KC allegedly agreed to: #Jonesworks alleges the parties executed:
— A “Non-Disclosure and Intellectual Property Rights and Non-Competition Agreement (the ‘Employment Agreement’)” and
— An “offer letter” (the “Offer Letter”).
Key restrictions in the Employment Agreement:
1) Confidentiality (survives termination): #Jonesworks pleads that KC agreed to keep confidential “any and all of Jonesworks’ proprietary information, including strategies, plans, financial information, and information pertaining to Jonesworks’ clients.” SJ also pleads: obligations “continue throughout [Case’s] employment…and remain in effect after the termination of [Case’s] employment.”
2) No Publication Provision (not time-limited): #Jonesworks pleads the contract barred her from “preparing or assisting any person or entity in the preparation of any books, articles, radio broadcasts, electronic communications, television or motion picture productions of other creations…concerning [Jonesworks]…or clients…” without “express authorization.” It emphasizes: “This provision is not restricted by time.”
3) Non-disparagement (media-focused): #Jonesworks quotes a clause prohibiting communications with “any reporter, author, producer or any similar person or entity, the press or other media” that “criticize, ridicule or make any statement that disparages or is detrimental to [Jonesworks]” and related parties.
4) Non-solicitation (two years post-termination): #Jonesworks pleads a two-year restriction barring KC from:
— “soliciting business from Jonesworks’ clients,”
— “providing services to Jonesworks’ clients,” or
— “persuading any Jonesworks client to cease doing business or reduce the amount of business the client does with Jonesworks.”
Because this restriction is limited to “two years following the termination,” it would run (on the pleadings’ dates) roughly from March 30, 2022 to March 30, 2024.
3️⃣ Factual Allegations of Misconduct
Access to confidential information while employed: #Jonesworks pleads that KC “worked on the accounts of some of Jonesworks’ most highprofile clients” and “was entrusted with confidential client information as part of her day-to-day responsibilities.”
Post-employment competitive conduct & alleged misuse: #Jonesworks alleges that at TAG, KC “began using the confidential information she obtained while at Jonesworks to undercut Jonesworks’ business by stealing Jonesworks’ clients, disparaging Jonesworks in the media… and gaining an unfair competitive business advantage.”
The Business Insider “hit piece” narrative: #Jonesworks pleads a focused story: KC allegedly “worked to place a hit piece about Jonesworks in Business Insider,” was “interviewed,” and “provided confidential information” including “confidential client lists and client communications.”
Alleged motive: #Jonesworks pleads an intent-to-poach theory: KC allegedly collaborated because she believed the article “would help persuade certain Jonesworks clients to move their business to a competitor PR firm for whom Case was working.”
Additional alleged conduct: Beyond Business Insider, #Jonesworks alleges: “Case wrote false copy for statements about Jonesworks and Stephanie Jones that Case believed would be disseminated publicly.”
Alleged consciousness of wrongdoing (Signal): #Jonesworks includes an allegation of concealment: communications “occurred in large part over…‘Signal,’ designed to auto-delete…to prevent later discovery of the paper trail tying Case to these actions.”
4️⃣ Causes of Action
(A) Count 1 — Breach of Contract
#Jonesworks pleads:
— Existence of a “valid and enforceable contract.”
— Specific obligations (confidentiality; no-publication; non-disparagement; non-solicitation).
— Specific breaches, including: “failing to maintain the confidentiality,” “using confidential information to solicit…business,” “publishing disparaging statements,” and “directly assisting in the preparation of articles.”
(B) Count 2 — Unfair Competition
#Jonesworks pleads that KC had access to “sensitive trade secrets and confidential information,” used it “in an effort to steal clients,” and engaged in “unauthorized use of Jonesworks’ proprietary information.” She further characterizes the conduct as “willful and egregious.”
5️⃣ Remedies Sought
Relief requested: #Jonesworks seeks
— “Monetary damages,”
— “Reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs…as allowed by law,”
— “Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest,” and
— other relief the Court deems proper.
Jury demand: “Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on all issues so triable.”
URL (JONESWORKS’ LLC COMPLAINT): ⬇️
https://t.co/GyTreFtlLu
URL (SUMMONS WITH NOTICE): ⬇️
https://t.co/8WiDlSkxMI
#BlakeLively #StephanieJones #Jonesworks #LivelyvsBaldoni #JonesvsAbel #JonesworksvsCase](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HR1hhNVW8AURyHW.jpg)
Stephanie Jones filed a New York Supreme Court lawsuit against former employee Katherine Case.
Plaintiff—Jonesworks LLC (SJ) sues former employee #KatherineCase (KC) in New York Supreme Court for allegedly breaching her employment agreement by disclosing confidential information, assisting a media “hit piece,” disparaging the firm, and soliciting clients after leaving for a competitor.
1️⃣ What #Jones Says Happened
SJ frames KC as a former senior employee who had close access to the firm’s and clients’ sensitive information and then allegedly weaponised that access after departing. SJ alleges she “began using the confidential information she obtained while working at #Jonesworks to publicly disparage #Jonesworks and #StephanieJones, and to attempt to steal clients away from #Jonesworks.”
SJ ties nearly every factual allegation to a written employment contract and then pleads two causes of action:
— Count 1: Breach of Contract (violations of multiple restrictive provisions).
— Count 2: Unfair Competition (misappropriation/unauthorised use of proprietary information to compete).
2️⃣ Context & Timeline (as pled by SJ)
#Jonesworks positions itself as “a highly respected public relations firm” founded and “solely owned by #StephanieJones” 🥳🥳🥳🥳
Employment & separation timeline:
— KC was hired “in or around September of 2021” as “Director of Strategic Communications and Crisis Management.”
— She resigned effective “March 30, 2022.”
— After leaving, she allegedly joined “The Agency Group (‘TAG’)—another PR firm in direct competition with Jonesworks.”
What KC allegedly agreed to: #Jonesworks alleges the parties executed:
— A “Non-Disclosure and Intellectual Property Rights and Non-Competition Agreement (the ‘Employment Agreement’)” and
— An “offer letter” (the “Offer Letter”).
Key restrictions in the Employment Agreement:
1) Confidentiality (survives termination): #Jonesworks pleads that KC agreed to keep confidential “any and all of Jonesworks’ proprietary information, including strategies, plans, financial information, and information pertaining to Jonesworks’ clients.” SJ also pleads: obligations “continue throughout [Case’s] employment…and remain in effect after the termination of [Case’s] employment.”
2) No Publication Provision (not time-limited): #Jonesworks pleads the contract barred her from “preparing or assisting any person or entity in the preparation of any books, articles, radio broadcasts, electronic communications, television or motion picture productions of other creations…concerning [Jonesworks]…or clients…” without “express authorization.” It emphasizes: “This provision is not restricted by time.”
3) Non-disparagement (media-focused): #Jonesworks quotes a clause prohibiting communications with “any reporter, author, producer or any similar person or entity, the press or other media” that “criticize, ridicule or make any statement that disparages or is detrimental to [Jonesworks]” and related parties.
4) Non-solicitation (two years post-termination): #Jonesworks pleads a two-year restriction barring KC from:
— “soliciting business from Jonesworks’ clients,”
— “providing services to Jonesworks’ clients,” or
— “persuading any Jonesworks client to cease doing business or reduce the amount of business the client does with Jonesworks.”
Because this restriction is limited to “two years following the termination,” it would run (on the pleadings’ dates) roughly from March 30, 2022 to March 30, 2024.
3️⃣ Factual Allegations of Misconduct
Access to confidential information while employed: #Jonesworks pleads that KC “worked on the accounts of some of Jonesworks’ most highprofile clients” and “was entrusted with confidential client information as part of her day-to-day responsibilities.”
Post-employment competitive conduct & alleged misuse: #Jonesworks alleges that at TAG, KC “began using the confidential information she obtained while at Jonesworks to undercut Jonesworks’ business by stealing Jonesworks’ clients, disparaging Jonesworks in the media… and gaining an unfair competitive business advantage.”
The Business Insider “hit piece” narrative: #Jonesworks pleads a focused story: KC allegedly “worked to place a hit piece about Jonesworks in Business Insider,” was “interviewed,” and “provided confidential information” including “confidential client lists and client communications.”
Alleged motive: #Jonesworks pleads an intent-to-poach theory: KC allegedly collaborated because she believed the article “would help persuade certain Jonesworks clients to move their business to a competitor PR firm for whom Case was working.”
Additional alleged conduct: Beyond Business Insider, #Jonesworks alleges: “Case wrote false copy for statements about Jonesworks and Stephanie Jones that Case believed would be disseminated publicly.”
Alleged consciousness of wrongdoing (Signal): #Jonesworks includes an allegation of concealment: communications “occurred in large part over…‘Signal,’ designed to auto-delete…to prevent later discovery of the paper trail tying Case to these actions.”
4️⃣ Causes of Action
(A) Count 1 — Breach of Contract
#Jonesworks pleads:
— Existence of a “valid and enforceable contract.”
— Specific obligations (confidentiality; no-publication; non-disparagement; non-solicitation).
— Specific breaches, including: “failing to maintain the confidentiality,” “using confidential information to solicit…business,” “publishing disparaging statements,” and “directly assisting in the preparation of articles.”
(B) Count 2 — Unfair Competition
#Jonesworks pleads that KC had access to “sensitive trade secrets and confidential information,” used it “in an effort to steal clients,” and engaged in “unauthorized use of Jonesworks’ proprietary information.” She further characterizes the conduct as “willful and egregious.”
5️⃣ Remedies Sought
Relief requested: #Jonesworks seeks
— “Monetary damages,”
— “Reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs…as allowed by law,”
— “Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest,” and
— other relief the Court deems proper.
Jury demand: “Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on all issues so triable.”
URL (JONESWORKS’ LLC COMPLAINT): ⬇️
https://t.co/GyTreFtlLu
URL (SUMMONS WITH NOTICE): ⬇️
https://t.co/8WiDlSkxMI
#BlakeLively #StephanieJones #Jonesworks #LivelyvsBaldoni #JonesvsAbel #JonesworksvsCase
Last Seen Hashtags on Sotwe
shemale india
Seen from Germany
anxiouspanda
Seen from Puerto Rico
سِِكُسْ_كتَاب
minichat(***)***************filter:videos
Seen from Germany
russian xxx
Seen from Turkey
EscritorasMexicanasContemporáneas
Seen from Poland
04dreamteam
Seen from United States
cheating weddingring
Seen from United Kingdom
bnwo #pmv
Seen from Canada
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk 
@elonmusk
241.7M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
119M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
114.5M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.9M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
107.2M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
98.7M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.4M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
91.8M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
90M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
84M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
75.5M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
73.5M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
70.9M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.8M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
66.5M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
65.2M followers
Selena Gomez
@selenagomez
63.1M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.3M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.8M followers
X
@x
60.7M followers