'Vanderpump Rules': Ariana Madix Files Motion to Dismiss Rachel Leviss' Revenge Porn Lawsuit

Ariana Madix wants Rachel Leviss' revenge porn lawsuit against her and her ex, Tom Sandoval , dismissed. The scandal that rocked Bravo unfolded during Season 10 of Vanderpump Rules when Sandoval's affair with Leviss, one of Madix's close friends, was discovered. Levis has accused the exes of creating revenge porn, eavesdropping, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and invasion of privacy. But Madix's team says it's untrue, per legal documents obtained by Entertainment Tonight . Madix's team filed a SLAPP suit -- a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, which is defined as legal action taken by one party that is intended to "dissuade their critics from continuing to produce negative publicity. By definition, SLAPP suits do not have any true legal claims against the critics," according to the Cornell Law School . Madix says it's a violation of her freedom of speech. In fact, they deny the entire ordeal, beginning with Madix being unaware of the affair from the start.

"Ms. Madix did not know about the affair. But on March 1, 2023, Ms. Madix learned about it in the worst possible way: by discovering a video on Mr. Sandoval's phone of Plaintiff and Mr. Sandoval having phone sex," Madix's legal counsel claims in the documents, adding she was devastated by the affair but admits she did inform her friends of what she found on the phone but never shared the videos.

"One thing Ms. Madix did not do was share or show any of the video footage she found on Mr. Sandoval's phone with anyone but Plaintiff. 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 Plaintiff," Susman and Arnold claim in the legal motion.

They also claim Leviss' suit is "laughable." "The only thing more laughable than Ariana's motion is her fairytale account of how she discovered the relationship from Tom's phone. Meanwhile, we look forward to cross-examining her on her declaration, as we have irrefutable evidence that the videos were distributed," her legal team told ET . "Lastly, the forensic 'expert' states that the video is not 'NOW' on her phone, well after the events in question and with months of notice that her actions had put her in legal jeopardy."