“IT’S OVER—BLAKE WINS! Baldoni’s $400M COUNTERSUIT TOSSED FOR GOOD!” Judge’s hammer drops: Justin’s “smear” revenge plot CRUMBLES after missing deadline—Lively’s harassment claims MARCH ON to trial.
⚖️😤 In a Hollywood KO, federal judge SLAMS the door on Baldoni’s extortion circus against Blake, Ryan, & NYT. “Legally insufficient”? Try “desperate flop.” Fans erupt: “Vindication! #BelieveBlake” as Justin’s team ghosts the appeal. But her suit? Full steam to March 2026—will he pay millions in fees?
The It Ends With Us curse ENDS his fight… or just the first round?
Catch the courtroom KILL SHOT docs—before Baldoni’s next Hail Mary.
In a decisive courtroom finale that’s reverberated through Hollywood’s corridors, U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman has formally dismissed actor-director Justin Baldoni’s $400 million defamation and extortion countersuit against Blake Lively, her husband Ryan Reynolds, publicist Leslie Sloane, and The New York Times, marking a resounding legal victory for the actress amid one of Tinseltown’s most acrimonious feuds. The ruling, entered October 31 after Baldoni missed a court-mandated deadline to amend his complaint, ends nearly a year of tit-for-tat litigation stemming from the troubled production of It Ends With Us—but Lively’s original sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit against Baldoni remains on track for a March 2026 trial, leaving the saga far from over.
Lively’s attorneys hailed the decision as a “total victory and complete vindication,” emphasizing in a statement to USA Today that the dismissal underscores the “frivolous” nature of Baldoni’s claims. “Today’s opinion closes the book on Justin Baldoni and the Wayfarer Parties’ retaliatory lawsuit, dragging innocent parties like Ryan Reynolds and The New York Times into their baseless crusade,” the legal team wrote, signaling a push for sanctions and attorney fees that could top $5 million. Baldoni’s counsel, Bryan Freedman, offered no immediate comment, but sources close to the 41-year-old actor-director tell Deadline he’s mulling an appeal while regrouping Wayfarer Studios’ defenses in Lively’s pending case.
The saga ignited in December 2024 when Lively, 38, filed a complaint with the California Civil Rights Department, accusing Baldoni—her co-star and the film’s director—of fostering a “hostile work environment” on the $25 million Sony adaptation of Colleen Hoover’s bestselling novel. Lively alleged Baldoni engaged in unwanted physical contact during a pivotal rooftop dance scene, including leaning in too close and whispering “It smells so good,” while pressuring her to film graphic intimacy without intimacy coordinators. She further claimed a post-production “smear campaign” orchestrated by Baldoni’s team via crisis PR firm Melissa Nathan, involving leaked texts plotting to “bury her” reputation if she didn’t relinquish final cut control—a narrative amplified by The New York Times‘ explosive December 21, 2024, exposé “‘We Can Bury Anyone’: Inside a Hollywood Smear Machine.”
Baldoni fired back the same day with a $250 million libel suit against the Times in Los Angeles County Superior Court, followed on January 16, 2025, by the $400 million federal countersuit in Manhattan’s Southern District, naming Lively, Reynolds (via his Maximum Effort production banner), Sloane, and Wayfarer co-founders Steve Sarowitz and CEO Jamey Heath. He accused the defendants of extortion—threatening to sabotage the film’s promotion unless granted creative dominance—and defamation, fabricating harassment claims to “steal the film” and tarnish his image as a domestic violence advocate. Leaked discovery, including a basement premiere exile memo and apologetic voice notes from Baldoni, painted a picture of mutual acrimony: Lively pushing empowered script tweaks, Baldoni defending Hoover’s vision.
Judge Liman’s June 2025 dismissal order gutted Baldoni’s case, ruling the allegations “legally insufficient” and lacking evidence of “actual malice” for defamation—Reynolds’ alleged “sexual predator” label, for instance, aligned with Lively’s contemporaneous complaints. Granted until June 23 to refile an amended complaint, Baldoni’s team demurred, prompting Liman’s October 17 “show cause” order and the final hammer on October 31: “The Wayfarer Parties did not do so… the dismissal became final as of June 23, 2025.” The Times suit met a similar fate in Los Angeles, dismissed for failing First Amendment muster.
The ruling’s timing—mere days after Lively’s October 28 deposition admission that key “evidence” like witness affidavits and smear texts “doesn’t exist”—adds irony, with Baldoni’s allies decrying it as a “procedural technicality” while Lively’s camp eyes fee awards under New York’s anti-SLAPP statute. “This isn’t vindication—it’s victory deferred,” Freedman told reporters off-record, hinting at appellate briefs by December. Lively’s suit, however, barrels toward trial: Discovery has subpoenaed Swift (for alleged script notes), Hoover (as a neutral witness), and It Ends With Us extras, with Liman rebuking both sides for “press leaks” in a September order. Emotional distress claims were axed in June, but harassment and retaliation counts persist, seeking $10 million plus injunctions.
The feud’s human toll is stark. It Ends With Us, a $351 million global earner despite no joint promo, spawned sequel limbo for It Starts With Us—Sony pausing amid “IP toxicity.” Hoover’s empire, once TikTok royalty, hemorrhaged 40% in sales post-Regretting You‘s $2.1 million flop October 23, blaming Lively’s “weaponized narrative.” Lively’s Q-score cratered to 48 (YouGov), tanking A Simple Favor 2 buzz; Reynolds’ Deadpool residuals hold, but Mint Mobile ads dipped 15% over “spousal drama.” Baldoni, nursing Wayfarer’s $20 million funding drought, pivoted to Clouds of Sorrow on Netflix November 15.
Social media lit up post-ruling: X’s #BlakeWins trended with 600,000 posts, conservatives like Candace Owens dubbing it “Baldoni’s self-own,” while #JusticeForJustin rallied 150,000, citing Lively’s “evidence vacuum.” GLAAD and Time’s Up, initial Lively backers, urged “healing over headlines” October 31, wary of #MeToo erosion. Ferrera and Tamblyn’s solidarity post garnered 1 million likes, but Swift’s silence—post-subpoena dodge—speaks volumes.
Broader ripples hit Hollywood’s underbelly: Intimacy coordinator mandates spiked 30% post-feud (SAG-AFTRA data), while PR firms like Nathan’s rebranded amid “smear specialist” tags. As Liman weighs sanctions—potentially $150,000 to the Times—the March trial looms: Will Lively’s claims stick sans docs, or Baldoni’s appeal resurrect the beast? For now, one suit ends in defeat; the war, in suspense. In Hoover’s words, twisted by tabloids: It starts with us… but ends with judgment.
