Blake Lively Made No Money in Justin Baldoni Settlement, But Legal Fight Is Not Quite Over

No money changed hands in the settlement between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni, but the legal fight between the “It Ends With Us” co-stars is not quite over.

Lively still has a pending motion for attorneys’ fees and damages in connection with Baldoni’s failed defamation suit against her.

“Anyone purporting to confirm the terms of the confidential settlement at this point is misleading you,” said a source close to the matter. “More information about this confidential settlement will be on the court’s docket in the coming days.”

Related Stories

Graham Norton Teases New Game Show ‘The Neighbourhood,’ Says Taylor Swift ‘Opalite’ Cameo Was a Dream Come True: 'She Made It Happen for Me’

Spotify Reveals All-Time Most-Streamed Artists, Albums, Songs and More: Taylor Swift, Bad Bunny and the Weeknd Top Lists

Lively agreed on Monday to drop her three remaining claims against Wayfarer Studios and the company’s team of publicists, avoiding a trial that was set to begin on May 18. Lively had alleged that Wayfarer — of which Baldoni is co-founder and co-chairman — illegally retaliated against her after she accused Baldoni of sexual harassment on the set of the film.

Most of Lively’s original claims — including all claims of sexual harassment — had already been dismissed last month.

By reaching a settlement, both sides avoided the multimillion-dollar cost of a federal trial. TMZ reported, along with Page Six and others, and Variety confirmed, that Lively received no compensation as part of the deal. Baldoni’s side was said to be “ecstatic” at the resolution of the case.

But Baldoni’s $400 million defamation suit — which was thrown out last June — still has to proceed to a final conclusion. Baldoni, Wayfarer, and the publicists filed the complaint in January 2025, alleging that Lively and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, and their publicists had leveraged false allegations of harassment in order to tarnish Baldoni’s reputation and hijack the film.

Judge Lewis Liman threw out the suit on the grounds that Lively’s allegations were included in legal filings and therefore immune.

In their motion to dismiss the complaint, Lively’s attorneys also sought attorneys’ fees, treble damages, and punitive damages under a 2023 California law meant to protect sexual abuse accusers from retaliatory defamation claims.

In his ruling, Liman took no position on whether the law — known as the Protecting Survivors from Weaponized Defamation Lawsuits Act — applied. He denied Lively’s claim for fees and damages under the act, but invited her to renew the motion, which she did in September.

Baldoni’s attorneys opposed the motion in October, arguing that it sought “draconian” relief and infringed on Baldoni’s constitutional right to petition the courts. The attorneys also argued that the California law should not apply to conduct that took place in New York and New Jersey. They later used a similar argument to successfully move to throw out Lively’s harassment claims that were filed under California law.

Equal Rights Advocates and the California Employment Lawyers Association, which sponsored the 2023 law, filed an amicus brief in May 2025 arguing that Baldoni’s defamation complaint was “the prototypical suit” which the law was meant to address.

“Ms. Lively is a public figure, and this lawsuit has captured the attention of the American public,” the groups argued. “The outcome of this motion will affect the decision-making of other victims of sexual harassment and assault.”