Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni Legal Drama Unfolds in Court Hearing

In a heated first court hearing, lawyers for Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni spar over sexual harassment and defamation claims stemming from their film, It Ends With Us. With allegations flying and media attention escalating, the judge warns against trying the case in the press.

Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni's legal dispute took center stage during their first court hearing in Manhattan, where attorneys for both actors engaged in a heated exchange over serious allegations made against each other related to their film, It Ends With Us.

Lively filed a legal complaint against Baldoni in December, accusing him of sexual harassment and launching a smear campaign against her. Baldoni has denied these allegations and countersued Lively for defamation among other claims. The high-profile actors were not present at the pretrial hearing, which lasted about an hour and a half, but tensions ran high as each side's lawyers accused the other of misconduct.

During the proceedings, Lively's attorney, Michael Gottlieb, emphasized the need for the case to be tried in court rather than in the media, criticizing Baldoni's lawyer, Bryan Freedman, for making disparaging comments about Lively’s character on news channels. Freedman, however, argued that Gottlieb was attempting to suppress his client’s narrative by imposing a "gag order" on their discussions.

Baldoni's legal representation stated that his client was suffering significant emotional and financial distress due to the fallout from the allegations. Following a successful box office run for It Ends With Us, rumors of discord between the co-stars have persisted, raising public interest in their legal battles.

Judge Lewis Liman, presiding over the case, remarked on the implications of media coverage, suggesting that extensive public discourse could compel him to expedite a trial date set for March 2026 to prevent bias against jurors. He noted that he would adopt a New York Bar Association rule restricting lawyers from making prejudicial public statements.

Baldoni’s legal team recently filed an amended complaint that included a 168-page timeline of events and even launched a website detailing the case, which Lively's team questioned in court. Lively's representatives have also threatened to file their own revised complaint that may involve additional parties in the ongoing legal struggles.

Furthermore, Baldoni is suing the New York Times for libel, alleging that Lively provided the publication with her civil rights complaint beforehand, a claim the Times has denied. Other public relations firms linked to both actors are also entangled in the legal confrontation, with some matters set to be addressed in a future trial.

During the session, Judge Liman expressed the necessity of agreeing to a protective order due to the high-profile nature of the case and the severe allegations involved. As the courtroom drama unfolds, both parties appear committed to resolving their issues swiftly, with a clear acknowledgment that future legal determinations lie ahead.