Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni, who settled their defamation fight weeks ago, were back in federal court Monday, June 1, as Lively pressed for attorney fees, costs, and damages after a judge dismissed Baldoni’s $400 million countersuit. The dispute now hinges
A courtroom packed enough to feel like a pressure chamber—then back again, only weeks after the parties said the long fight had ended.
On Monday. June 1. attorneys for Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni returned to court in Manhattan before Judge Lewis Liman. with the case now focused on what comes next after settlement: Lively’s request that Baldoni pay her costs. fees and damages tied to the 2025 defamation lawsuit he filed against her—an effort a judge later dismissed. Lively. 38. is seeking compensatory payments and additional damages under a new California law. even as Baldoni’s side argues the statute can’t be used to bypass a jury trial.
The settlement may have closed one door, but it didn’t end the argument. According to court documents. Lively is invoking a California law designed to protect people who file harassment complaints from retaliatory defamation suits. She argues she is entitled to all compensatory rewards the statute provides—attorney’s costs and fees to defend herself in the litigation. along with punitive damages and treble damages. Treble damages, by the statute’s structure, would triple the amount of actual damages if she wins.
In a letter to Judge Liman, Baldoni’s attorney, Ellyn S. Garofalo. wrote that “there is no authority to support the notion” that the California statute backing Lively’s claims “can be used to do an end run around a plaintiff or defendant’s right to a jury trial.” She also argued that because Lively “has dismissed her claims” and “relinquished her right to appeal. ” she is not entitled to damages.
Lively’s lawyers frame the law differently. They argue the statute “helps take the burden off of survivors by providing reasonable attorneys’ fees and damages if they successfully defend themselves against meritless lawsuits.” The motion points to Lively’s successful bid to dismiss Baldoni’s earlier $400 million countersuit against her. her husband Ryan Reynolds and The New York Times.
The sequence of events has left both sides talking past each other on the same core question: after the defamation claims were trimmed—and after settlement—what remedies are still available, and how far can a new state statute reach inside a federal case.
Lively and Baldoni’s dispute traces back to a January 2025 lawsuit and a fast-growing legal tangle. Baldoni. 42. took legal action against Lively in response to a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit she had filed against him and his production company. In that suit. she claimed Baldoni sexually harassed her on the set of the domestic violence drama “It Ends with Us” and helped orchestrate a smear campaign against her.
Liman ultimately dismissed Baldoni’s countersuit in June 2025. The judge ruled in line with Lively’s motion that Baldoni’s claims of civil extortion. defamation and false light did not hold up legally. The legal fight didn’t stop there. The two continued in court over Lively’s suit. and on April 2. Liman dismissed all but three of her 16 causes of action.
As the case inched toward a trial date, the stakes rose. Days before trial was set to begin on May 18, Lively and Baldoni reached a settlement in the case.
But Monday’s return to court made the aftermath the new battlefield. Lively’s motion asks for fees. costs and damages tied to the defamation lawsuit that Baldoni filed in 2025 and that was dismissed by the court. Baldoni’s team says that the law Lively is relying on can’t be used to bypass the rights that normally attach to unresolved issues before a jury.
The representatives for Lively and Baldoni were reached for comment, according to the reporting that prompted this latest round of filings. Contributors to the coverage included KiMi Robinson.
Blake Lively Justin Baldoni defamation lawsuit settlement Judge Lewis Liman California law attorney fees treble damages punitive damages It Ends with Us Ryan Reynolds New York Times civil extortion false light
So she settled but still suing for money? Confusing.
Isn’t settlement supposed to end it though? Sounds like they just keep finding new ways to ask for more.
They keep saying “new California law” but it’s literally about taking away a jury right? I mean that’s what I heard on TikTok so… seems shady. Also $400 million countersuit?? That’s insane. Maybe the judge just wanted to punish him with attorney fees.
Wait I thought the settlement already happened weeks ago, so why are they in Manhattan again? I’m lost. I saw something about treble damages and figured it means they automatically triple whatever, like no debate. But maybe that’s not how it works lol.