Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni Legal Dispute Update
A recent court ruling entitled Blake Lively to recover attorney and litigation fees in a legal battle with Justin Baldoni. Judge Lewis J. Liman decided in writing that Lively could recover costs associated with defending a countersuit initiated by Baldoni. This followed after Lively’s December 2024 lawsuit, though claims for triple damages and punitive damages were denied.
Baldoni’s attorney, Bryan Freedman, provided a statement emphasizing Lively’s failed attempt. “We fought against allegations of sexual harassment, retaliation, and a smear campaign that were never substantiated,” Freedman stated. He detailed that Lively demanded more than $300 million in fees and damages and faced the dismissal of 10 out of 13 claims, ultimately settling without compensation.
“Despite all sexual harassment and defamation claims being dismissed, Lively tried to exploit a California law meant for real victims, seeking damages; once again, she failed,” Freedman added. He asserted Baldoni’s legal team achieved justice and uncovered truth.
Lively’s representation criticized Freedman’s comments, calling them false and accusing him of attempting to sue into submission claims made in good faith. They noted, “Thankfully, there’s law against such actions, which the court applied today.”
The conflict traces back to late 2024 when Lively accused Baldoni of harassment during “It Ends With Us” production, claiming damage to her reputation upon raising concerns. Baldoni denied these allegations and counter-sued Lively, her spouse Ryan Reynolds, and others, pursuing $400 million for defamation and related claims, including actions against The New York Times.
By June 2025, many facets of Baldoni’s countersuit were dismissed, with statements in question being legally protected, preventing these from advancing. In May 2026, a settlement resolved most issues, with terms undisclosed.
The case spanned into 2026 with partial victories for both sides, narrowing several initial claims ahead of trial. Retaliation-related matters persisted in the case, concluding with the May 2026 settlement.