Blake Lively will recover legal fees from Justin Baldoni’s production company after a federal judge ruled that she is entitled to costs under a California law protecting sexual harassment survivors, but she cannot seek additional damages for his defamation claims, according to multiple outlets.
Judge Nails Down Legal Fees, Leaves Damages Open
U.S. District Judge Lewis J. Liman ruled that Blake Lively is “entitled to attorneys’ fees under Section 47.1” of California’s Protecting Survivors From Weaponized Defamation Lawsuits Act, which shields individuals who report sexual misconduct from retaliatory defamation claims. The law, enacted in 2023, ensures that if a plaintiff brings a defamation claim against a defendant for statements related to sexual assault, harassment, or discrimination and the defendant wins, the plaintiff must pay the defendant’s legal fees unless the statements were made with malice. Liman concluded there was “no evidence of malice” in Lively’s complaints, which were made during the production of the 2024 film “It Ends With Us,” which Baldoni directed and starred in.
“The statute ensures that if a plaintiff invokes California law to bring a defamation claim against a defendant for making statements regarding sexual assault, harassment, or discrimination, and the defendant succeeds in dismissing the claim, the plaintiff must pay the defendant’s legal fees and costs unless it turns out that the statements were made with malice,” Liman’s ruling reads. “Lively made statements that come within the purview of Section 47.1.”
Baldoni had filed a $400 million defamation lawsuit against Lively in 2024, alleging she spread false claims of harassment to tarnish his reputation. The case was dismissed in January 2025, but Lively’s legal team argued she was entitled to fees under Section 47.1. The judge agreed, stating that Lively acted “without malice” when she made her sexual misconduct complaints. “Allegations are insufficient on their own to demonstrate that statements were in fact made with malice,” Liman wrote. “That determination requires some evidence.”
Settlement Averts Trial, Preserves Legal Pathways
The ruling came days after Lively and Baldoni reached a settlement in May 2026, which included Baldoni waiving his right to appeal the dismissal of his $400 million lawsuit. While the terms of the agreement were not disclosed, the settlement “preserves Ms. Lively’s rights to obtain those damages” through other legal avenues, according to Lively’s attorneys, Esra Hudson and Michael Gottlieb. “The Court is awarding Ms. Lively attorneys’ fees and costs and has explained that a prevailing defendant under Section 47.1 may seek damages using different procedural mechanisms,” they said in a statement.
Baldoni’s representative, Bryan Freedman, criticized the ruling, calling it a “fruitless mission to obtain damages” and claiming Lively “failed” despite having 10 of her 13 claims dismissed. “Ms. Lively demanded over 300 million in fees and damages, had 10 of her 13 claims dismissed, she then chose to settle and received nothing,” Freedman said in an email. “Throughout this process, innocent people had their reputations unfairly tarnished. There was no sexual harassment. There was no retaliation. There was no smear campaign.”
The settlement averted a high-profile trial in New York, where Lively had accused Baldoni of sexual harassment and retaliation during the production of “It Ends With Us.” Baldoni denied the allegations and had previously sued The New York Times over an article titled “‘We Can Bury Anyone’: Inside a Hollywood Smear Machine.” Liman dismissed both suits last year.
Legal Fees Could Be Substantial, With Key Questions Unanswered
Lively’s legal team, led by Michael Gottlieb and Esra Hudson, is expected to submit a detailed breakdown of their fees, which could be “sky-high” given their reputation as “heavyweight litigators,” according to The Hollywood Reporter. The court will determine the exact amount Baldoni must pay, though the judge explicitly ruled that compensatory and punitive damages are not covered under Section 47.1. “Compensatory and punitive damages do not fall within that exception,” Liman wrote.
The ruling also highlights the broader implications of Section 47.1, which has been cited as a tool for survivors to challenge retaliatory lawsuits. Lively’s attorneys framed the decision as a victory for the law’s purpose: “Ms. Lively is gratified that her lawsuit shows how Section 47.1 and laws like it create a path for survivors to hold accountable those who weaponize online attacks and retaliatory lawsuits to intimidate and silence survivors,” they said in a statement.
However, critics argue the law could be exploited. Freedman claimed Lively “pivoted to exploit a California law that was established to protect real victims in what proved to be a fruitless mission to obtain damages.” The judge’s decision to allow Lively to pursue damages through other means—such as an independent lawsuit or a counterclaim—leaves room for future legal battles.
What Comes Next? A Legal and Cultural Crossroads
The case has already had a significant cultural impact, with “It Ends With Us” becoming a focal point for discussions about power dynamics in Hollywood.
Find more reporting in our Entertainment section.
