Blake Lively fires back against Justin Baldoni as she files to dismiss $400M lawsuit in shocking twist

Blake Lively has now filed to dismiss Justin Baldoni’s $400 million defamation lawsuit against her in scathing new legal documents.  

In court documents obtained by DailyMail.com, Lively’s attorneys slammed Baldoni’s ‘vengeful and rambling’ lawsuit as a ‘profound abuse of the legal process that has no place in federal court.’

In a shocking twist, the documents also state that Wayfarer’s legal efforts against Lively may end up costing them $100 million due to a mandatory fee shifting provision in California Civil Code Section 47.1.

It’s the latest update in the messy legal ordeal between Lively and Baldoni, which officially began in December 2024 after Lively accused her It Ends With Us co-star of sexual harassment and a retaliatory smear campaign and was followed by a defamation lawsuit against Lively by Baldoni. All parties have denied the allegations against them. 

DailyMail.com has contacted representatives for Baldoni and Lively for comment.  

In the introduction and summary of their argument, Lively’s legal team argues the lawsuit against her has ‘no place in federal court’ due to legal protections against individuals who have spoken out about sexual harassment or filed legal claims.

‘The law prohibits weaponizing defamation lawsuits, like this one, to retaliate against individuals who have filed legal claims or have publicly spoken out about sexual harassment and retaliation,’ the documents state. 

‘The right to seek legal redress and the right of the press to report on it are sacred principles that are protected by multiple privileges, including the litigation and fair report privileges, which are absolute.

‘Moreover, by choosing to bring their claims under California law, the Wayfarer Parties have voluntarily subjected their entire lawsuit to the sexual harassment privilege in the recently enacted California Civil Code Section 47.1 (“Section 47.1”), which bars retaliatory lawsuits based on public disclosures of sexual harassment and related allegations, including disclosures to the press.’

The documents also claim the ‘Wayfarer parties’ – Baldoni’s studio – will be responsible for Lively’s attorney’s fees, treble damages (an award three times what the jury decides to give the plaintiff), and punitive damages should their lawsuit be dismissed. 

‘On top of that, Section 47.1 contains a mandatory fee shifting provision that will require the Wayfarer Parties to pay not only Ms. Lively’s attorneys’ fees, but also treble damages and punitive damages if and when their defamation lawsuit is dismissed. In other words, in an epic self-own, the Wayfarer Parties have created more liability for themselves by their malicious efforts to sue Ms. Lively “into oblivion.”’

With this fee shifting provision in mind, the documents note that Steve Sarowitz, the co-founder of Wayferer Studios, may end up forking over the $100 million he allegedly pledged to spend on litigation in a manner he did not intend. 

‘Steve Sarowitz may indeed make good on his threat to spend “$100 million” litigating against Ms. Lively, but perhaps not in the way he planned.’

Lively’s lawyers, Matt Gottlieb and Esra Hudson, said in a statement obtained by DailyMail.com: ‘This lawsuit is a profound abuse of the legal process that has no place in federal court. California law now expressly prohibits suing victims who make the decision to speak out against sexual harassment or retaliation, whether in a lawsuit or in the press. 

‘This meritless and retaliatory lawsuit runs head first into three legal obstacles, including the litigation, fair report, and sexual harassment privileges, the latter of which contains a mandatory fee shifting provision that will require the likes of billionaire Steve Sarowitz, Wayfarer Studios, and others that brought frivolous defamation claims against Ms. Lively to pay damages. In other words, in an epic self-own, the Wayfarer Parties’ attempt to sue Ms. Lively “into oblivion” has only created more liability for them, and deservedly so, given what they have done.’

Her spokesperson also said in a statement: ‘The painful reality is that Ms. Lively is not alone in being sued for defamation after speaking up about being sexually harassed at work. That is entirely why California recently enacted AB 933, the Privileged Communications Incident of Sexual Assault, Harassment, or Discrimination Act, which codified California Civil Code Section 47.1. 

‘While Ms. Lively has suffered greatly by speaking up and pursuing legal claims, it is important for other people to know that they have protections, and that there is a specific law that expressly protects them from being silenced or financially ruined by a defamation lawsuit because they had the courage to speak up.’