Blake Lively Counters Justin Baldoni’s Lawsuit with Retaliation Claim, Echoing Husband Ryan Reynolds’ Defense
The legal battle between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni has intensified, with Lively filing a motion to dismiss the lawsuit brought against her by her former "It Ends with Us" co-star. This action mirrors a similar motion filed by her husband, Ryan Reynolds, earlier in the week, signaling a united front against Baldoni’s claims. Lively’s legal team is aggressively pushing for the dismissal, characterizing Baldoni’s lawsuit as a "vengeful and rambling" attempt to punish her for speaking out about alleged sexual harassment on set.
The contentious dispute stems from the film adaptation of Colleen Hoover’s popular novel, "It Ends with Us." What began as a promising project quickly devolved into a series of accusations and counter-accusations, ultimately leading to the current legal standoff. Lively publicly accused Baldoni of sexual harassment during the film’s production, a claim that Baldoni vehemently denies. He retaliated by alleging that Lively and Reynolds leveraged their celebrity status to extort and defame him, a claim both actors vehemently deny.
The conflict was further complicated by a wave of online criticism directed at Lively, portraying her as a "mean girl." Initially, this negative publicity appeared organic, but Lively later asserted that it was the result of a coordinated smear campaign orchestrated by Baldoni. This accusation adds another layer of complexity to the already tangled web of allegations and counter-allegations.
Lively’s motion to dismiss argues that Baldoni’s lawsuit is an illegal act of retaliation, designed to silence her and punish her for coming forward with her allegations of sexual harassment. Her legal team emphasizes that the law protects individuals who speak out about such experiences, preventing them from being targeted with defamation lawsuits intended to silence or financially ruin them.
The motion is a direct response to the lawsuit filed by Baldoni and his production company, Wayfarer Studios, which produced "It Ends with Us." The lawsuit accuses Lively of conspiring with The New York Times to defame Baldoni in a December article that detailed Lively’s claims of harassment. Lively’s lawyers have dismissed this accusation as an "epic self-own" by Wayfarer, arguing that their attempt to silence Lively has only increased their own liability.
The filing also makes reference to alleged statements by Wayfarer’s co-founder, Steve Sarowitz, who reportedly threatened to spend $100 million litigating against Lively. Lively’s legal team suggests that Sarowitz’s threat may backfire, potentially exposing Wayfarer to further legal repercussions.
Lively’s lawyers further attacked the logic behind Baldoni’s lawsuit, describing it as contradictory. They point out that Baldoni and Wayfarer simultaneously portray Lively as an immensely powerful Hollywood superstar, capable of manipulating events through her influence, while also claiming she was so powerless that she had to fabricate sexual harassment allegations a year in advance to gain any leverage.
Addressing Baldoni’s claims of defamation, Lively’s legal team echoed the arguments made by Reynolds in his motion, stating that defamation requires the accuser to believe their claims are false. Lively’s filing asserts that she genuinely believed she had been harassed and mistreated on set, rendering Baldoni’s defamation accusation baseless.
A representative for Lively issued a statement emphasizing the importance of protecting individuals who speak out about sexual harassment, stating, "The painful reality is that Ms. Lively is not alone in being sued for defamation after speaking up about being sexually harassed at work. 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."
Reynolds, in his own motion to dismiss, argued that Baldoni had essentially identified himself as a "predator" through his writings and podcast appearances. He further criticized Baldoni for suing over "hurt feelings" and reaffirmed his support for his wife’s claims.
Baldoni’s legal team responded to Reynolds’ motion by accusing him of exploiting his power in Hollywood to seek dismissal from the case, despite his alleged involvement extending beyond simply being a supportive spouse. They argue that Reynolds’ actions demonstrate an arrogant disregard for the legal process.
The legal battle between Lively and Baldoni is poised to continue into next year, with a trial date looming. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for individuals who speak out about workplace harassment, potentially shaping the legal landscape surrounding defamation claims and retaliation lawsuits. The case also continues to draw intense media attention, fueled by the celebrity status of the individuals involved and the sensitive nature of the allegations. The courtroom drama promises to be a closely watched spectacle, with the potential to reverberate throughout the entertainment industry and beyond.
