The lawsuit tying together Justin Baldoni, Ryan Reynolds, Disney, and Marvel was a $400 million countersuit Baldoni filed in January 2025 against Reynolds and Blake Lively, which tried to sweep in Disney and Marvel Studios over a Deadpool & Wolverine character Baldoni said was designed to mock him. A federal judge dismissed the countersuit in June 2025, quashed the Marvel subpoena the same day, and the wider dispute between Baldoni and Lively settled in May 2026 with no cash payment changing hands.
Why Disney and Marvel Got Pulled In
The Marvel piece grew out of a character named “Nicepool,” a Deadpool variant appearing in the 2024 film Deadpool & Wolverine, which Ryan Reynolds co-wrote and starred in. Baldoni’s legal team described Nicepool as a “misogynistic alternate version” of Deadpool whose dialogue tracked the specific harassment accusations Blake Lively had made against Baldoni on the set of It Ends With Us.
Nicepool asks on screen, “Where in God’s name is the intimacy coordinator?!” and remarks on a female character “snapping back” into shape after childbirth. When challenged, the character says, “It’s OK, I identify as a feminist,” a line Baldoni’s lawyers said targeted Baldoni, who had publicly described himself as a feminist while promoting It Ends With Us.1Variety. Marvel Won’t Have to Turn Over Documents Ryan Reynolds Nicepool Nicepool is eventually killed by “Ladypool,” a character voiced by Lively.2ComicBookMovie.com. Justin Baldoni’s $400 Million Lawsuit Against Deadpool and Wolverine’s Blake Lively Is Officially Closed A deleted scene had Nicepool announce that his “calling is to one day start a podcast that monetizes the women’s movement,” which Baldoni’s side read as a reference to his Man Enough podcast on masculinity and gender.3Variety. Justin Baldoni Legal Letter Disney Marvel Nicepool Ryan Reynolds
On January 7, 2025, Baldoni’s attorney Bryan Freedman sent a litigation hold letter to Disney CEO Bob Iger and Marvel president Kevin Feige. The letter demanded preservation of all documents related to Nicepool’s development, any communications about Baldoni, records of complaints against Reynolds by any person, and documents about director Tim Miller’s departure from Deadpool 2.3Variety. Justin Baldoni Legal Letter Disney Marvel Nicepool Ryan Reynolds
The $400 Million Countersuit
On January 16, 2025, Baldoni, Wayfarer Studios, publicist Jennifer Abel, and crisis manager Melissa Nathan sued Lively, Reynolds, and Lively’s publicist Leslie Sloane in the Southern District of New York. The suit alleged civil extortion, defamation, and false light invasion of privacy, and sought $400 million in damages. It was assigned case number 1:25-cv-00449 and routed to Judge Lewis J. Liman, who was already handling Lively’s own lawsuit against Baldoni.4CourtListener. Wayfarer Studios LLC v. Lively5ABC News. Blake Lively Justin Baldoni Legal Battle Timeline
The complaint accused Lively and Reynolds of using “extortionate threats” to seize creative control of It Ends With Us. It centered on a 17-point list of demands presented to the production after the 2023 Hollywood strikes, which Baldoni’s side said was “not open for negotiation,” and alleged the couple leveraged the threat of financial ruin and the potential firing of hundreds of crew members to force compliance. The filing also alleged that Reynolds pressured talent agency WME to drop Baldoni as a client and berated Baldoni in what the suit called a “traumatic” confrontation, reportedly calling him a “sexual predator.”6NPR. Blake Lively Justin Baldoni Ryan Reynolds It Ends With Us Lawsuit
Baldoni’s team argued Reynolds went further by writing Nicepool into Deadpool & Wolverine as a caricature of Baldoni, tying Disney and Marvel into the dispute as document custodians.
Reynolds’ Motion to Dismiss
Reynolds filed a motion to dismiss on March 18, 2025. His lawyers characterized Baldoni’s complaint as “thin-skinned outrage” and a “burn book filled with grievances.” They did not dispute that Nicepool was based on Baldoni, but argued that hurt feelings do not add up to a legal claim.7Variety. Ryan Reynolds Justin Baldoni Lawsuit Hurt Feelings
On defamation, Reynolds’ attorneys argued that calling Baldoni a “predator” was constitutionally protected opinion rather than a false statement of fact. They also contended the description was “substantially true,” pointing to Baldoni’s own past public statements about his “addiction to pornography” and “crossing boundaries.” The motion asserted a First Amendment right for Reynolds to hold “deep disdain” for any man he believed sexually harassed his wife.7Variety. Ryan Reynolds Justin Baldoni Lawsuit Hurt Feelings
Marvel Fights the Subpoena
On April 25, 2025, Marvel asked Judge Liman to quash Baldoni’s subpoena and issue a protective order. The studio argued the requested documents were “particularly sensitive” because they concerned “the development of a character in an ongoing movie franchise” with interconnected storylines and future projects.8Deadline. Blake Lively Justin Baldoni Ryan Reynolds Latest
Marvel got its win on June 9, 2025. The same day Judge Liman dismissed the countersuit, he granted Marvel’s request. Because the defamation claims underpinning the Nicepool subpoena had been thrown out, the judge ruled the requested information was “no longer relevant to a claim or defense in this action.”9People. Marvel Granted Request to Be Removed From Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni Legal Drama Disney and Marvel never had to produce documents, and neither company was ever named as a defendant.
The Countersuit Dismissed
Judge Liman dismissed the entire $400 million countersuit on June 9, 2025. He found that Lively’s underlying accusations of sexual harassment, made to the California Civil Rights Department and shared with The New York Times, were shielded by litigation privilege, which immunizes statements made in connection with legal proceedings from defamation claims. Coverage of those allegations by the Times was separately protected by the fair report privilege.
Claims against Reynolds and publicist Sloane were dismissed because the judge found they were relying on Lively’s account and had no reason to doubt it. The defamation and civil extortion claims were dismissed with prejudice. Baldoni was given until June 23, 2025, to file an amended complaint on narrower contract-interference allegations, but he chose not to amend. Final judgment was entered on October 31, 2025.10Variety. Judge Dismisses Justin Baldoni Blake Lively Defamation Suit5ABC News. Blake Lively Justin Baldoni Legal Battle Timeline
The May 2026 Settlement
The core case between Lively and Baldoni continued for nearly a year after the countersuit fell. With trial set for May 18, 2026, the parties settled. The deal included no cash payment to Lively from Baldoni or Wayfarer Studios.11Deadline. Blake Lively Settlement Details Justin Baldoni Baldoni and the Wayfarer defendants dropped the already-dismissed countersuit and irrevocably waived any right to appeal.12People. Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni’s Settlement Terms Revealed Lively voluntarily dismissed her remaining claims but reserved the right to pursue attorney fees and damages under California Civil Code Section 47.1, the Protecting Survivors from Weaponized Defamation Lawsuits Act.
A joint statement acknowledged that “the process presented challenges” and recognized that “concerns raised by Ms. Lively deserved to be heard.” Lively’s attorneys called this an end to the “fiction that Ms. Lively fabricated claims of sexual harassment and retaliation.” Baldoni’s attorney Bryan Freedman called the outcome a “total victory,” arguing Lively settled because she “knew they were going to lose in court.”12People. Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni’s Settlement Terms Revealed
On June 12, 2026, Judge Liman granted Lively’s motion for attorney fees under Section 47.1, finding she qualified as a “prevailing defendant” who made sexual misconduct complaints “without malice.” He ordered Wayfarer Studios to pay her legal defense costs, though he denied her request for treble damages and punitive damages, ruling those remedies were unavailable under federal law.13Variety. Blake Lively Attorney Fees Justin Baldoni It Ends With Us Under the settlement, neither side may appeal.14The New York Times. Blake Lively Legal Fees Ruling Justin Baldoni Settlement
What Started All of This
Disney and Marvel were never accused of wrongdoing in this litigation. They became relevant only because Baldoni’s team believed a character in one of their films was written to attack him. The dispute itself began on the set of It Ends With Us, the 2024 film adaptation of Colleen Hoover’s novel about domestic violence, which Baldoni directed and in which he co-starred with Lively.
In January 2024, an “all hands” meeting brought together Lively, Baldoni, Reynolds, and other stakeholders to address what Lively described as a hostile work environment. It produced formal workplace protections, including a requirement that Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios CEO Jamey Heath stop making unsolicited comments about their own sexual experiences, that an intimacy coordinator be present for scenes between Lively and Baldoni, and that no friends of the producers be on set during nude scenes.15BBC News. Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni Legal Battle
On December 20, 2024, Lively filed a complaint with the California Civil Rights Department accusing Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios of sexual harassment and retaliation.5ABC News. Blake Lively Justin Baldoni Legal Battle Timeline She followed with a federal lawsuit in the Southern District of New York on December 31, naming Baldoni, Wayfarer, and members of his PR team as defendants. Her complaint alleged Baldoni and his team ran a coordinated online smear campaign against her, citing internal communications she had obtained by subpoena. Among them: a plan from a TAG staffer describing a “social and digital mitigation and remediation” strategy whose goal was to “monitor and directly influence forums” and “execute all without fingerprints.”16NewsNation. Blake Lively’s Team Cites Emails as Proof of Smear Campaign
Baldoni’s countersuit, filed a little over two weeks later, was the response. When the judge threw out the countersuit’s defamation claims, he removed the legal basis for the subpoena to Marvel, and the Disney and Marvel piece of the story ended there.