Blake Lively dealt fresh blow as judge rejects bid for massive payout from Justin Baldoni following shock settlement

Blake Lively has suffered a final humiliation in her case against Justin Baldoni after a judge rejected her bid to seek potentially tens of millions of dollars in additional damages from her It Ends With Us co-star and director.

Judge Lewis Liman on Friday ruled that the actress could not seek treble and punitive damages under a California law designed to protect people who come forward with allegations of sexual misconduct.

In a scathing 47-page ruling, he accused Lively, 38, of trying to make an 'end run' around the law and 'circumvent' what it was meant for.

Had the judge ruled differently, Baldoni and his production company, Wayfarer Studios, could have been forced to pay tens of millions of dollars, beyond the costs associated with defending the case. 

Lively, however, did score one legal victory after Judge Liman ruled that she is entitled to costs associated with Baldoni's failed $400 million defamation lawsuit against her - which could run into the millions.

The ruling is a bitter blow to Lively, who continued the case against Baldoni even after both sides reached a settlement last month in New York.

She was seeking treble and punitive damages over his defamation case against her, which Baldoni filed in January last year and was dismissed five months later.

Then in April this year, Judge Liman also dismissed most of Lively's case, in which she was seeking $160 million in damages for lost income and damage to her reputation.

The law Lively invoked in her bid to recover damages from Baldoni is California Civil Code Section 47.1, a relatively untested piece of legislation that was passed in 2023 in California in response to the MeToo movement.

It was designed to shield people who come forward with allegations of sexual impropriety from retaliatory defamation lawsuits - with lawmakers believing that the threat of costly legal action could deter alleged victims from speaking out. 

But Judge Liman said that Lively's request 'circumvents processes designed for the orderly, just, and fair determination of civil claims in federal court'.

He said she was trying to mount a 'kind of malicious prosecution or abuse of process claim' against Baldoni and his film studio, which produced the movie, Wayfarer. 

Judge Liman objected to the idea of what would amount to a mini-trial taking place 'without the benefit' of briefings, as should normally happen.

He said that the law 'does not create an end run around the entire set of carefully crafted federal procedural rules designed to protect the rights of the parties.

'It instead establishes a narrow exception to the usual litigation process for a specific and limited kind of relief. Compensatory and punitive damages do not fall within that exception.'

Judge Liman said he was granting Lively's request for legal fees because it was 'on much firmer ground'.

But the judge said that he made no finding at this stage as to the 'appropriate measure of fees', or how much Lively will get for her legal costs.

Sources have told the Daily Mail that both sides have blown as much as $60 million on high-powered attorneys, but any fees will only cover the cost of defending Baldoni's failed lawsuit. 

A source close to Lively downplayed the ruling as 'procedural' and said it left open the door to seek damages by 'other means'.

That could even include an entirely new lawsuit to go after the money, the source said.

'Today was a procedural ruling. The court leaves the door open to seeking damages by other means like an independent lawsuit or a counterclaim, including in federal court,' the source said.

Another bright spot in the ruling for Lively was that the judge found no evidence of malice, a legal term which means making a false claim knowing that it was false.

The ruling effectively means that, according to Judge Liman, Lively really did believe what she was alleging.

The decision by Judge Liman could finally mark the beginning of the end of a case that was due to go to trial last month before both sides settled it

The case pitted Lively, the star of the Gossip Girl series, against Baldoni, who claimed to be a feminist, woke actor and director who became involved with It Ends With Us because of its message about domestic violence.

In the movie, Lively played florist Lily Bloom, who begins a relationship with Baldoni, who plays abusive neurosurgeon Ryle Kincaid.

But in the summer of 2024, when the movie came out, it became overshadowed by rumors of a feud on set between Baldoni and Lively.

Then in December that year, she filed a complaint with the California Civil Rights Department alleging she was harassed on set by Baldoni and others.

Among the claims was that Baldoni 'fat-shamed' her by asking her personal trainer about her weight: he claimed it was because he was worried about hurting his back during a scene where he lifted her up.

Lively also alleged that Baldoni inserted unscripted kisses into a scene where they were dancing together, and that his producer, Jamey Heath, walked into her trailer when she was breastfeeding her newborn baby.

According to Lively, Baldoni ordered an online smear campaign against her, which led to negative comments on social media that harmed her businesses and her reputation.

The controversy surrounding the movie turned it into a box-office juggernaut, earning $351 million worldwide.

Lively's attorneys, Esra Hudson and Michael Gottlieb, told the Daily Mail in a statement on Friday: 'Blake Lively won her motion under Civil Code Section 47.1. Today's ruling makes it clear that Ms Lively brought her claims in good faith, that there was no evidence she acted with malice, and that she is the prevailing defendant under Section 47.1. 

'The court is awarding Ms Lively attorneys' fees and costs and has explained that a prevailing defendant under Section 47.1 may seek damages using different procedural mechanisms. 

'The parties' settlement agreement expressly preserves Ms Lively's rights to obtain those damages. Ms Lively is gratified that her lawsuit shows how Section 47.1 and laws like it create a path for survivors to hold accountable those who weaponize online attacks and retaliatory lawsuits to intimidate and silence survivors.'

The Daily Mail has contacted Baldoni's representatives for comment. 

Early last month, the Daily Mail revealed Lively was still pursuing Baldoni for legal fees and damages tied to his failed $400 million defamation case against her - just days after the feuding parties reached a settlement.

In a joint statement announcing the settlement on May 4, neither side apologized but they acknowledged Lively's claims 'deserved to be heard.' 

Lively's attorneys commented further, calling the agreement a 'resounding victory' for their client.

'By agreeing to this settlement, and waiving their right to appeal, Justin Baldoni and every individual defendant now face personal liability for abusing the legal system to silence and intimidate Ms Lively.

'And by admitting that Ms Lively's concerns 'deserved to be heard,' the defendants have ended once and for all the fiction that Ms Lively 'fabricated' claims of sexual harassment and retaliation.

'From day one, Blake Lively's mission was clear: expose and hold accountable those who weaponize smear campaigns and retaliatory lawsuits to intimidate and silence survivors. That mission continues,' the statement concluded. 

Gottlieb, one of the Gossip Girl star's lawyers, said the court should impose 'severe and mandatory penalties against any party who files unsuccessful retaliatory defamation actions against sexual harassment and retaliation complainants.'