Blake Lively was awarded $407,451.75 in attorneys’ fees and litigation costs by a federal judge, falling far short of the approximately $8 million she demanded from actor and director Justin Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios. U.S. District Judge Lewis J. Liman called the actress’s multi-million-dollar demand an outrageously unreasonable demand
in a written decision issued in Manhattan.
Judge Cuts Lively Legal Fee Request to $400,000
The ruling grants Lively $363,245.40 in attorneys’ fees and $44,206.35 in costs stemming from a countersuit filed against her. Lively had sought a total of $8,035,040.88—comprising $7,495,526.87 in attorneys’ fees and $539,514.01 in litigation costs. Judge Liman found that while the hourly rates charged by Lively’s lawyers were not unreasonable given the complexity of the case, the total number of hours for which she sought reimbursement was excessive. The judge also noted that Lively’s documentation was incomplete because she submitted a declaration from a fee expert rather than the actual invoices.
Origins of the Legal Battle Over It Ends With Us
The legal fallout stems from the production of the 2024 film It Ends With Us, an adaptation of Colleen Hoover’s 2016 novel. In December 2024, Lively sued Baldoni and his associates, alleging sexual harassment, breach of contract, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy, and a retaliatory smear campaign after she spoke up. Baldoni denied the allegations, claiming the complaints were manufactured as part of an effort by Lively to seize creative control of the movie.
Weeks after Lively’s initial lawsuit, Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios filed a countersuit against Lively and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, alleging civil extortion, defamation, invasion of privacy, breach of good faith and fair dealing, and economic interference. Judge Liman dismissed Baldoni’s defamation-related counterclaims in June 2025. In that decision, Liman determined that Lively qualified as a prevailing defendant under California Civil Code Section 47.1, making her eligible to seek reasonable attorneys’ fees and litigation costs for defending herself against the defamation claim.
Scope of Recoverable Fees and Settlement
In determining the final payout, Judge Liman ruled that Lively was not entitled to recover fees for the litigation as a whole or for media relations and press coverage. The judge explained that the California law meant to protect sex abuse survivors from retaliatory lawsuits could only be construed to reimburse her for defending against defamation claims rather than all claims brought against her by Baldoni.
Baldoni’s legal team had urged the judge to deny the motion or substantially reduce the award, pointing out that Lively’s attorneys had billed more than 7,000 hours across 82 timekeepers and overstaffed the case.
Lively and Baldoni settled their broader litigation in early May, just two weeks before the case was scheduled to go to trial in New York. Neither party earned money in the settlement, and no funds changed hands. In a joint statement released at the time, both sides stated that the film remained a source of pride and that they remained committed to workplaces free of improprieties.
