Johnny Depp is suing Amber Heard for defamation, for her having implied that he abused her. In the context of their legal representation, her lawyers have repeated these allegations in even more explicit form. For example:
So why is Eric George not simply added as a defendant in that same lawsuit?
Is there some specific legal exemption whereby you can say whatever you want in representation of your client? Or perhaps some implied understanding that any statement of fact that a lawyer says when representing a client really means “my client’s position is that …”, or perhaps “my client’s legal position for purposes of this case is that …”, such that it wouldn’t be actionable?
There is a widely-recognized common law immunity to claims of libel for participants in a judicial proceeding, as long as the statements bear a relationship to the proceeding. See, for example, this D.C. Court of Appeals case, which cites to the Restatement (Second) of Torts. It seems to extend somewhat broader than statements in the course of litigation, but I don’t know if it extends to a press release and I can’t open your link (for some reason), so I don’t know the context of the statement.
There is also the so-called “fair reporting” privilege which protects, generally, an accurate report of an official proceedings or something said in the course of it. It typically applies to newspaper reports (and the like), but a quick search shows that it can sometimes apply to press releases. But again, I don’t know the context of the statement nor do I know the law in the relevant jurisdictions.
Presumably they didn’t sue Smollett because, unlike his lawyers, he did not publically accuse them of attacking him. But in any event, the lawyers’ statements were made in the context of their representation of Smollett. (I guess anyone can sue anyone, and the Osundairos haven’t won yet. Still, I’ve not seen any legal exemption cited in coverage of this story.)