Blake Lively drops claims against Justin Baldoni in high-profile December 2024 lawsuit. The actress accused Baldoni of orchestrating a campaign of sexual harassment and public defamation. This accusation led to a snake pit of counter abused lawsuits and damaged counterclaims. The lawsuit came years after the debut of a movie adaptation of the popular entities Colleen Hoover novel.
In her lawsuit, Lively claimed for emotional distress and claimed large compensatory damages. The latter, Justin Baldoni’s legal team demanded she release her medical records and therapy notes to prove her allegations. The federal judge assigned to the case, Lewis Liman, threw out Baldoni’s motion to compel their release. Liman noted that Lively’s counterclaims for emotional distress should be thrown out. This creates a new layer of complexity to the jurisprudential litigation that continues to unfold.
Baldoni joined with publicist Melissa Nathan and eight other plaintiffs to sue. They subsequently filed a $250 million libel lawsuit against The New York Times. They charged the publication with “cherrypicking” information in its extensive coverage of the ongoing case. The plaintiffs claimed that the media, through its actions, had shaped a false public narrative that tarnished their reputations.
Set against these hopeful and positive changes, Baldoni announced his intention to sue Lively and her husband, Ryan Reynolds. Our planned lawsuit apart from their claims was going to include civil extortion, defamation, and invasion of privacy on their end. Lively’s attorneys, Esra Hudson and Mike Gottlieb, characterized Baldoni’s filings as “a press stunt,” suggesting that they were designed more for public relations than for legal merit.
“The Baldoni-Wayfarer strategy of filing retaliatory claims has exposed them to expansive new damages claims under California law, rendering certain of Ms. Lively’s original claims no longer necessary.” – Esra Hudson and Mike Gottlieb
Even as damages roll back in her case, Lively holds firm to her claims of emotional distress related to Baldoni’s alleged threats of conversion therapy. Her lawyers contend that Baldoni’s tactics are solely meant to intimidate, not protect the public. Adding to the motion circus, reports say that Lively’s wish to not reveal information related to her emotional distress claims makes the situation even more complicated.
“Ms. Lively wants to simultaneously: (a) refuse to disclose the information and documents needed to disprove that she suffered any emotional distress and/or that the Wayfarer Parties were the cause; and (b) maintain the right to re-file her IED claims at an unknown time in this or some other court after the discovery window has closed.” – Variety
As both parties gear up for continued litigation, the legal battle reflects personal grievances and highlights issues surrounding public image and media influence in celebrity culture.