Lively seeks $8m legal bill after Baldoni countersuit dismissed
Blake Lively is demanding $8 million from Justin Baldoni and his studio after a federal judge ruled she is entitled to recoup the costs of defeating his $400 million countersuit, establishing a warning for companies that use litigation as a PR weapon.
Blake Lively has asked a federal court to order Justin Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios to pay $8,035,040 in legal fees and costs. The filing, submitted on 30 June, follows a judge's ruling that Lively is entitled to reimbursement for fighting a $400 million countersuit brought by her director and co-star.
The dispute stems from Lively's December 2024 complaint of sexual harassment against Baldoni during the making of the 2024 film It Ends With Us. Baldoni responded in January 2025 with a massive countersuit accusing Lively and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, of civil extortion, defamation and invasion of privacy. A court dismissed the defamation claim in June 2025, and the underlying lawsuit was settled in May 2026.
Lively’s legal team is now seeking $7,495,526.87 in attorneys' fees alongside $539,514.01 in associated costs. Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios have until 13 July to either agree to the payment or challenge the exact figure in court.
For media companies and corporate executives, the dispute highlights the immense financial exposure involved in aggressive, coordinated legal and public relations strategies. Lively's lawyers characterised Baldoni's response as "scorched-earth litigation tactics designed to drain Lively’s resources."
In a 15-page memorandum, attorneys Michael Gottlieb and Esra Hudson accused Baldoni's team of running a "near-daily press campaign" alongside expansive, irrelevant discovery demands and abusive court filings. The memorandum argued the countersuit was never intended to succeed in court, but was instead a tool to smear Lively’s reputation and intimidate witnesses.
“This gross abuse of the legal system was not meant to win in court,” the memorandum reads. “Its aim was to retaliate against Lively by falsely branding her a liar, intimidating witnesses and the media, and discouraging others from speaking out.”
The case serves as a stark reminder to businesses that weaponising the justice system to manage corporate crises carries severe financial risks if the strategy fails. “Thanks to this landmark decision, those considering using a lawsuit as a weapon of intimidation have been put on notice that there are consequences for doing so,” Gottlieb and Hudson said.
They added that the value of the ruling lies in "the precedent it creates, the accountability it imposes, and the protection it provides to those who may one day find themselves facing similar retaliation for speaking the truth." Baldoni's legal representatives did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
