Judge Dismisses Justin Baldoni’s $400 Million Countersuit Against Blake Lively
A federal judge has formally dismissed Justin Baldoni’s $400 million countersuit against Blake Lively, ending one of several legal disputes between the It Ends With Us co-stars. The ruling formally ends Baldoni’s countersuit, which challenged the legal protections provided under California’s survivor protection statute in defamation-related claims.
Judge Lewis Liman of the Southern District of New York entered a final judgment after Baldoni and his production company, Wayfarer Studios, missed a court deadline to amend their complaint. The case, originally dismissed in June, was left open for potential revision. When no updated filing was submitted by October 17, the judge finalized the dismissal at Lively’s request.
The dispute began in December 2024, when Lively accused Baldoni of sexual harassment and retaliation following tensions during the production of It Ends With Us. Baldoni denied the allegations and responded with a countersuit against Lively, her husband Ryan Reynolds, their publicist Leslie Sloane, and the New York Times, claiming defamation, civil extortion, and invasion of privacy. He sought $400 million in damages, alleging that Lively’s accusations damaged his career and his company’s reputation.
In June, Judge Liman dismissed Baldoni’s filings, ruling that Lively’s statements were protected under California’s Protecting Survivors From Weaponized Defamation Lawsuits Act, also known as AB 933. Although the case was heard in New York federal court, the judge applied California law because the alleged conduct and the film’s production occurred in that state. The 2023 law was designed to prevent individuals accused of harassment or abuse from suing their accusers simply for speaking out. It extends protections to survivors who make good-faith statements about their experiences, effectively strengthening California’s broader anti-SLAPP framework, which discourages lawsuits intended to silence or intimidate critics.
The court found that Baldoni’s filings did not meet the legal standard for extortion or defamation. Under U.S. defamation law, public figures must prove that a statement was false, caused measurable harm, and was made with “actual malice,” meaning the speaker knew it was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. In his June ruling, Judge Liman also dismissed Baldoni’s separate lawsuit against the New York Times, finding that the publication reviewed available evidence and did not act with malice in its reporting.
Baldoni’s attorney previously argued that the court had allowed him to amend four of his claims, but no revised filing was submitted. By missing the October deadline, Baldoni forfeited that opportunity, and the court’s earlier dismissal order became final.
Although the final dismissal resulted from Baldoni’s failure to refile his claims, the case drew attention for its connection to California’s new survivor protection statute, AB 933. That law became an early point of reference in the court’s earlier rulings and highlights how state-level reforms are influencing defamation and retaliation disputes nationwide.
Lively’s separate lawsuit against Baldoni is scheduled to go to trial in March 2026. The filing accuses him of sexual harassment, retaliation, and defamation related to their work on It Ends With Us, allegations Baldoni denies.
