Justin Baldoni’s lawsuit was dismissed on June 9, 2025, when U.S. District Judge Lewis J. Liman threw out the $400 million countersuit that Baldoni and his production company, Wayfarer Studios, had filed against Blake Lively, Ryan Reynolds, and Lively’s publicist. The judge found that the civil extortion, defamation, and invasion of privacy claims all failed as a matter of law. Baldoni chose not to refile. The larger dispute between the two It Ends With Us stars ended almost a year later, in May 2026, with a settlement reached just weeks before trial.1ABC News. Justin Baldonis 400M Countersuit Blake Lively Ended Judge
Why the Countersuit Was Dismissed
Baldoni filed the countersuit on January 16, 2025, a little over two weeks after Lively formalized her own federal lawsuit alleging sexual harassment and a retaliatory smear campaign. His 179-page complaint accused Lively of civil extortion, defamation, false light invasion of privacy, interference with contracts, and breach of implied covenant of good faith.2E! Online. Blake Lively Justin Baldoni Legal Battle Extortion Claims Addressed
Judge Liman’s 132-page opinion dismantled each theory. On extortion, the centerpiece of the case, the court ruled that Baldoni and Wayfarer had “not adequately alleged that Lively’s threats were wrongful extortion rather than legally permissible hard bargaining or renegotiation of working conditions” under California law.1ABC News. Justin Baldonis 400M Countersuit Blake Lively Ended Judge
The defamation claims ran into two separate legal walls. First, statements Lively made in the course of her own lawsuit were shielded by the litigation privilege and could not support a defamation claim. Second, the judge ruled that Baldoni qualified as a public figure under New York Times v. Sullivan, which meant he had to prove actual malice, a standard the court found his arguments were “circumstantial and lacked adequate foundation” to meet.3First Amendment at MTSU. Wayfarer Studios Justin Baldoni v Blake Lively The New York Times
The same ruling ended a related $250 million defamation suit Baldoni had filed against The New York Times over its December 2024 article on the alleged smear campaign. Judge Liman found no evidence the paper “acted with actual malice” and concluded the Times had “no obvious motive to favor Lively’s version of events,” applying the fair report privilege that protects accurate reporting on judicial proceedings.4BBC. Justin Baldoni Blake Lively Countersuit
The Decision Not to Amend
The judge gave Baldoni until June 23, 2025, to amend and refile certain narrower claims relating to interference with contracts.5Courthouse News Service. NY Times Sues Baldonis Production Company to Recoup Costs of Tossed Defamation Suit His legal team let the deadline pass. Attorney Bryan Freedman said the choice was tactical: “Our clients chose not to amend their complaint to preserve appeal rights.”6People. Justin Baldoni Lawyer Fires Back Explains Why They Chose Not to Amend 400 Lawsuit Against Blake Lively Freedman added that the dismissal had “no effect whatsoever on the truth that there was no harassment nor any smear campaign.”7NewsNation. Justin Baldoni Blake Lively Counter Claims Judge Liman entered final judgment closing the countersuit on October 31, 2025.8ABC News. Blake Lively Justin Baldoni Legal Battle Timeline
What Happened to Lively’s Case
Lively’s own lawsuit continued after the countersuit collapsed, but it also lost ground. On April 2, 2026, Judge Liman dismissed 10 of her 13 causes of action. The sexual harassment claims under California law failed because the alleged conduct occurred during filming in New Jersey and lacked a sufficient California connection. The judge also found that Lively worked as an independent contractor rather than an employee, which disqualified her from bringing certain harassment and retaliation claims under federal civil rights law. Defamation claims against Baldoni’s attorney fell to the litigation privilege.9BBC. Blake Lively Justin Baldoni Ruling Dismissed Claims
Three claims survived and were scheduled for a May 18, 2026 trial: retaliation under California law against Wayfarer and the production company, aiding and abetting retaliation against Baldoni’s PR agency, and breach of the Contract Rider Agreement, a side letter of workplace protections signed on Lively’s behalf in January 2024. Judge Liman noted that while the defendants could engage in crisis management, “certain conduct at least arguably crossed the line.”9BBC. Blake Lively Justin Baldoni Ruling Dismissed Claims
The May 2026 Settlement
Two weeks before jury selection, on May 4, 2026, Lively and Wayfarer announced a settlement. In a joint statement, the parties said they were “firmly committed to workplaces free of improprieties and unproductive environments” and hoped the agreement would “bring closure and allow all involved to move forward constructively and in peace.”10ABC News. Justin Baldoni Lawyer Publishes Settlement Blake Lively
Financial terms were not disclosed, and the deal did not include a damages payout to Lively.11The Hollywood Reporter. It Ends With Us Settlement Blake Lively Freedman called the outcome a “huge victory” for Baldoni, pointing to the dismissal of the harassment claims and the absence of a monetary award.12TMZ. Bryan Freedman Reacts to Blake Lively Justin Baldoni Settlement
Attorney Fees
The settlement left one question deliberately unresolved: Lively’s request for attorney fees under California’s Protecting Survivors from Weaponized Defamation Lawsuits Act, a statute meant to protect people who report sexual misconduct from retaliatory defamation suits. Both sides agreed to accept the court’s ruling on fees and not to appeal it.13Variety. Blake Lively Attorney Fees Justin Baldoni It Ends With Us
On June 12, 2026, in a 47-page order, Judge Liman ruled that Lively qualified as a “prevailing defendant” under the statute. He found that Baldoni and Wayfarer had provided “little evidence” and “none establishing” that Lively acted with malice when she sued, and he ordered Wayfarer to pay her legal fees.14The New York Times. Blake Lively Legal Fees Ruling Justin Baldoni Settlement The judge denied her requests for triple damages and punitive damages, ruling those remedies were unavailable under federal procedural rules.15First Amendment Watch. Judge Awards Blake Lively Legal Fees but No More Damages in Dispute Over It Ends With Us Film
Fallout After the Dismissal
In September 2025, The New York Times filed its own lawsuit against Wayfarer Studios in New York Supreme Court under the state’s anti-SLAPP law, seeking to recoup at least $150,000 in legal fees it had spent defending Baldoni’s dismissed defamation suit.16People. Justin Baldoni Company Sued by New York Times Dropped Defamation Case Fees The status of that case as of mid-2026 has not been publicly reported.5Courthouse News Service. NY Times Sues Baldonis Production Company to Recoup Costs of Tossed Defamation Suit
Baldoni’s professional standing took a lasting hit. WME dropped him as a client the day before the initial Times article ran in December 2024, his podcast co-host quit within days, and a “Voices of Solidarity” award he had been set to receive was rescinded.17Deadline. Blake Lively Justin Baldoni Feud Timeline Industry sources told The Hollywood Reporter that Baldoni faces a difficult path back to mainstream filmmaking, with one studio executive saying it would be “hard to imagine he could cast a movie” given the allegations of an unsafe set. Wayfarer Studios retains the financial backing of billionaire Steve Sarowitz, which could allow Baldoni to self-finance future projects.18The Hollywood Reporter. Where Blake Lively Justin Baldoni Careers Stand