Introduction

A series of lawsuits between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni, stars of the 2024 blockbuster movie It Ends With Us, has captivated both the public and the legal community in recent months. The legal battle presents conflicting accounts of events on set during the making of the film, which is an adaptation of a novel about domestic abuse. In the movie, Lively portrays the heroine, while Baldoni plays her abusive partner.

Facts

On December 20, 2024, Blake Lively submitted an official complaint to the California Civil Rights Department, alleging that director and co-star Justin Baldoni, producer Jamey Heath, and Wayfarer Studios engaged in sexual harassment and fostered a hostile workplace.[i]

Lively specifically alleges Baldoni invaded her privacy by “entering her makeup trailer uninvited while she was undressed,” pressured her to lose weight four months after giving birth, and coordinated a PR campaign with a crisis firm “designed to ‘destroy’ Ms. Lively’s reputation.”[ii]

At issue in the December 20, 2024 complaint is whether any of the individuals violated California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). The FEHA safeguards employees from discrimination, harassment, and retaliation, with sexual harassment being a particularly severe violation that could result in substantial legal consequences for both the production company and those involved. In Lively’s situation, the claims of unwarranted physical contact and the absence of consent for intimate scenes may constitute unlawful workplace sexual harassment. However, this is a particularly complicated situation.[iii] Since these incidents reportedly occurred during production and involved key figures—director Baldoni and producer Heath—Lively will need to present evidence demonstrating the persistent and widespread nature of the harassment to support her claims.[iv]

The New York Times released an article on the allegations the following day, also suggesting underlying conflicts, including an alleged effort to tarnish Lively’s reputation.[v] The New York Times article referenced private text messages and emails that Blake Lively had obtained through a subpoena and included in her complaint. According to the complaint, these messages allegedly revealed that Baldoni and his business partner, Heath, collaborated with a crisis public relations expert to damage Lively’s reputation out of fear that her misconduct allegations would surface.[vi]

That same day, Baldoni responded by filing a defamation lawsuit against The New York Times in Los Angeles Superior Court, claiming the publication had relied on Lively’s “unverified and self-serving narrative.”[vii] Baldoni argues the publication’s report on the sexual harassment allegations was part of a larger “smear campaign” designed to discredit him, directly contradicting Lively’s claims. He asserts that Lively harmed his reputation by spreading false information.[viii]

The lawsuit, which seeks $250 million in damages, accuses The New York Times of uncritically accepting a “self-serving narrative” by the actress that Mr. Baldoni, his production company, and their public relations team worked to harm her reputation after she complained about misconduct during the film’s shooting. It asserted the Dec. 21 article deliberately omitted portions of text exchanges and other information that contradicted the actress’s version of events.[ix]

“The article’s central thesis, encapsulated in a defamatory headline designed to immediately mislead the reader, is that plaintiffs orchestrated a retaliatory public relations campaign against Lively for speaking out about sexual harassment — a premise that is categorically false and easily disproven,” the complaint said.[x]

On December 31, 2024, Lively filed a lawsuit against Baldoni and others in New York federal court in New York City, formalizing her California Civil Rights Complaint into a full-fledged lawsuit.[xi] Her decision to file the case in New York, despite initially bringing her civil rights complaint in California, appears to be a strategic choice regarding jurisdiction. While California law may offer stronger protections, New York’s legal system allows for a more expedited path to litigation, enabling Lively and her team to sidestep certain procedural barriers.[xii]

Lively’s lawsuit alleges that Baldoni, Heath, and crisis PR specialist Melissa Nathan orchestrated a campaign to damage her reputation by manipulating social media, spreading negative stories, and using crisis communication tactics to safeguard Baldoni’s public image. According to Lively, this effort included text exchanges between Nathan and Baldoni discussing strategies to “bury” individuals and target high-profile women. The lawsuit further claims that key financial backers at Wayfarer Studios, including co-founder Steve Sarowitz, were also implicated in the scheme. Lively’s challenge will be proving these negative media tactics were not just part of a standard public relations effort to manage the fallout from her allegations but were deliberate and defamatory actions intended to damage her reputation.

On January 16, 2025, Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios filed a lawsuit against Lively, Reynolds, and publicist Leslie Sloane, seeking an astonishing $400 million in damages. Filed in the federal District Court for the Southern District of New York, the suit expands on previous claims, alleging civil extortion, defamation, and multiple contract violations.[xiii]

The lawsuit argues that the dispute stemmed from a creative power struggle, alleging Lively progressively overstepped her role as an actor by asserting control over key production elements. According to the complaint, she took charge of wardrobe decisions, rewrote scenes, attempted to create her own cut of the film, and ultimately sought to exclude Baldoni from promotional efforts. The suit strongly denies any allegations of sexual harassment or misconduct by Baldoni, Heath, or the production team. Instead, it claims Lively and Reynolds engaged in “extortionate threats” aimed at tarnishing Baldoni’s reputation. [xiv]

Takeaways

The series of lawsuits and subsequent media campaigns by both parties have undoubtedly been fueled by anger, but it’s important for both litigants and lawyers to keep this emotion in check. To avoid a Nuclear Verdict®, we recommend defusing anger altogether—whether it’s between the parties, the court, or even (and especially) the jury’s. To do this, it is important that counsel show empathy and compassion for both sides. Attempting to destroy the opposing side’s credibility may have a time and place, but it should not be the sole focus of litigation.

Keep Reading

From the Kitchen to the Courtroom: Bargains, Bread and Briefs Arizona Business Owners Owe a Duty of Reasonable Safety to Invitees, Unreasonably Dangerous Condition or Not Not So Peachy Lately: Georgia Attacking Nuclear Verdicts® with New Tort Reform Laws Cracking the Code: Demystifying the Legal Lingo in Insurance Defense Day in the Life of a Litigator: Keith Bostwick Collaboration Is Key to Preparation in the Weeks Before Trial But I Didn’t Mean to Do It … Be Bold, Be Bright, But Be Brief… Taming the Wolf: Florida’s Fifth DCA Holds the Line on Tort Reform

More by this author

It Ends with Lawsuits for Hollywood Co-Stars Stale Bread: Workers Accuse Panera of Wage Theft Red Hot Water: Former Chili Pepper Guitarist Sued in Wrongful Death Action A Seat at the Table: Supreme Court Rules Insurers Have a Right to Be “Heard on Any Issue” in Chapter 11 Cases To Speak or Not to Speak: Appellate Court Rules on Doctors’ Defamation Lawsuit Modern Headache: Actress Sofia Vergara is Sued for $1.7 Million by Former Contractor A League of Their Own: Sports Leagues’ Novel Argument Fails to Persuade California Appellate Court Up In Smoke: Insurer Sues Landlord For Failure to Obtain Liability Insurance from Tenant  The Truck Stops Here: Dispute Over Trucking Company’s Liability Makes Its Final Stop at the Ninth Circuit

Sources

[i]    Read Blake Lively’s Complaint Against Wayfarer Studios, The New York Times, December 21, 2024, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/12/21/us/complaint-of-blake-lively-v-wayfarer-studios-llc-et-al.html

[ii]   Blake Lively Accuses ‘It Ends With Us’ Star Of Sex Harassment, Craig Clough, Law360, December 23, 2024, https://www.law360.com/articles/2277258/blake-lively-accuses-it-ends-with-us-star-of-sex-harassment

[iii]   Id.

[iv]   See Cal. Gov’t Code § 12940 (West).

[v]   See, generally, Read Blake Lively’s Complaint.

[vi]   Id.

[vii] Wayfarer Studios, LLC, v. New York Times, 24STCV34662 (Ca. Sup. Ct. Dec. 31, 2024)

[viii] Id.

[ix]   Id.

[x]   Id.

[xi]   Lively v. Wayfarer Studios, LLC, 1:24-cv-10049, (S.D.N.Y.)

[xii] Id.

[xiii] Wayfarer Studios, LLC, v. Lively, 1:25-cv-00449, (S.D.N.Y.)

[xiv]    Id.