Former NFL player Matt Kalil is pointing to the famous sex tape case involving Pamela Anderson in his legal fight against ex-wife Haley Baylee.

In new court papers obtained by Page Six, Kalil filed a motion opposing Baylee's request to dismiss his lawsuit.

He is suing her for invasion of privacy and unjust enrichment after she made graphic comments about his body during a November 2025 Twitch stream.

According to Page Six, Kalil's legal team argues that courts have long protected people from having intimate details exposed without consent.

To support that claim, they cited the 1990s legal dispute between Anderson and musician Bret Michaels over the release of a private sex tape.

In the filing, Kalil referenced the court's view that "sexual relations are among the most personal and intimate of acts."

He also noted that even though Anderson had appeared nude in magazines and films, the court ruled that "the fact that she has performed a role involving sex does not... make her real sex life open to the public."

Matt Kalil Seeks $75K Over Alleged Privacy Violation

The documents further argued that prior public exposure does not erase a person's right to privacy.

According to the motion, courts have recognized that some facts are "so intimate and personal" that sharing them serves no public purpose, even when the person is well known.

Kalil claims Baylee's statements about his anatomy caused "unwanted attention and invasive commentary from the public."

He is seeking $75,000 in damages, citing emotional distress, humiliation and reputational harm, Yahoo reported.

His lawsuit states that Baylee "shared these sensitive personal details... as entertainment for viewers and for her own financial gain."

Baylee, 33, has asked the court to throw out the case. In her filing, she argues the comments are "constitutionally protected" speech and describes them as a "truthful, autobiographical account" tied to the end of their marriage.

Kalil's attorney, Ryan Saba, said Baylee disclosed "private and intimate details" that were of "no legitimate public concern" and subjected his client and family to ridicule.

He added that a former spouse does not have the right to expose confidential marital details for profit and expects the motion to dismiss to be denied.

Tags
Pamela Anderson