The bitter legal battle between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni over allegations of misconduct and retaliation linked to the making of “It Ends With Us” moved closer to a conclusion Friday after a federal judge ordered Baldoni and his production company to pay Lively's attorneys' fees related to his failed defamation lawsuit against her, while rejecting her bid for additional damages.
In a 47-page order, U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman determined that Lively was entitled to recover legal fees under a California law intended to protect people who report sexual misconduct from retaliatory defamation claims, and ruled that Baldoni's side had not shown that she acted with malice in making her allegations.
But Liman denied Lively's request for treble and punitive damages, concluding that the procedural mechanism her lawyers used allowed for recovery of attorneys' fees and costs, but not broader financial penalties.
Lively's attorneys, Esra Hudson and Michael Gottlieb, called Friday's ruling a victory for their client and emphasized that the judge found “there was no evidence that she acted with malice.”
“The Court is awarding Ms. Lively attorneys' fees and costs and has explained that a defendant who prevails under Section 47.1 may seek damages using different procedural mechanisms,” the attorneys said in a statement. “The parties' settlement agreement expressly preserves Ms. Lively's rights to such damages.”
While the judge denied Lively's request for additional damages in this particular motion, her legal team said she could still seek them through other legal avenues allowed by the statute.
Bryan Freedman, Baldoni's attorney, sharply disputed Lively's characterization of the ruling, arguing that the court's previous decisions had substantially undermined many of her original claims.
“There was no sexual harassment. There was no retaliation. There was no smear campaign,” Freedman said in a statement. “The court recognized it, the record reflects it and we have maintained it from the beginning.”
The amount that Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios will ultimately have to pay has not yet been determined. Lively's attorneys must still submit billing records and fee calculations for court approval.
The ruling follows last month's settlement between Lively and Baldoni, which came just before what was expected to be a closely watched federal trial in Manhattan. Under that agreement, neither party received financial compensation. But the settlement preserved Lively's ability to seek attorneys' fees and damages under California Civil Code Section 47.1, a relatively new statute designed to protect accusers of sexual harassment and assault from retaliatory defamation claims.
Lively sued Baldoni, Wayfarer Studios, Wayfarer CEO Jamey Heath and others in December 2024, alleging that Baldoni and his associates orchestrated a coordinated effort to damage her reputation after she raised concerns about misconduct during production of the film, which Baldoni directed and co-starred in. Baldoni denied any wrongdoing.
Baldoni and Wayfarer subsequently filed a $400 million defamation lawsuit against Lively, her publicist Leslie Sloane and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, which was dismissed last year. Friday's ruling specifically addressed whether Lively could recover attorneys' fees and damages related to that dismissed lawsuit under California Civil Code Section 47.1.
The latest ruling comes after Liman earlier this year dismissed 10 of the 13 claims in Lively's lawsuit, including sexual harassment and defamation claims, while allowing retaliation-related claims to proceed.
In Friday's ruling, Liman wrote that Baldoni's team had not presented evidence showing that Lively acted maliciously in making her accusations.
“The allegations alone are insufficient to demonstrate that the statements were actually made with malice,” the judge wrote. “That determination requires some evidence.”
Friday's ruling offered each side new grounds to claim vindication in a legal battle that has played out in both public statements and court documents. Lively's team highlighted the judge's conclusion that she acted without malice, while Baldoni's lawyers emphasized that many of her original claims had been dismissed.
Still, the agreement prevents both sides from appealing Liman's ruling, which could end one of Hollywood's ugliest recent legal fights.
