Court Rules: Baldoni Pays Lively's Legal Fees in It Ends With Us Settlement

In a significant legal win for Blake Lively, a federal judge has ordered Justin Baldoni to cover her defense costs following their highly publicized settlement over the It Ends With Us production dispute. Judge Lewis J. Liman ruled on Friday, June 12 that Lively, 38, qualified for fee recovery under California’s 2023 anti-SLAPP statute—a law designed to shield sexual abuse accusers from retaliatory defamation lawsuits meant to silence them.

The ruling validates Lively’s decision to fight back. Liman found that Baldoni and the Wayfarer parties failed to demonstrate that the legal privilege blocking their claims should apply, leaving Lively as the“prevailing defendant”under Section 47.1. Her attorneys, Esra Hudson and Michael Gottlieb, issued a statement emphasizing that the court’s decision confirms their client“brought her claims in good faith”and without malice. This matters because it signals judicial confidence that her accusations weren’t frivolous—they were legitimate concerns worthy of legal pursuit.

What makes this ruling particularly noteworthy is what it didn’t award. Judge Liman declined Lively’s requests for triple damages and punitive damages, determining those remedies fall outside federal law’s scope on procedural grounds. However, her legal team notes that the settlement agreement itself preserves her right to pursue damages through different mechanisms, suggesting this fight may not be entirely over.

The backstory here is crucial context. Lively’s original lawsuit, filed in December 2024, alleged that Baldoni, 42, subjected her to sexual harassment, created a hostile work environment, and orchestrated a smear campaign against her. Baldoni denied everything and countersued. In June 2025, a judge dismantled his $400 million lawsuit against her. Then in April, most of Lively’s claims—including harassment, defamation, and conspiracy—were dismissed. Despite those setbacks, this fee award represents validation that her core grievance was legitimate enough to warrant legal protection under a statute specifically designed for survivors.

The settlement itself arrived just hours before Lively walked the Met Gala on May 4, with both sides issuing a joint statement about finding“closure.”Both camps expressed commitment to“workplaces free of improprieties”and raising awareness about domestic violence—the central theme of It Ends With Us itself. Yet this June ruling shows the legal machinery didn’t stop there. It refined what“winning”actually means: sometimes it’s not about the damages awarded, but about having the court officially recognize that you fought for something real.