Blake Lively Wins Legal Fees From Justin Baldoni, but Judge Denies Extra Damages

A Court Win, but Not a Blank Check

Blake Lively has won the right to recover legal fees and costs from Justin Baldoni in their long-running legal fight tied to It Ends With Us. But the court did not give her everything she asked for.

U.S. District Judge Lewis J. Liman ruled that Lively can seek attorney fees connected to Baldoni’s dismissed defamation case. At the same time, the judge denied her request for broader financial penalties, including punitive damages and treble damages.

That is the real shape of the ruling.

It is a win for Lively. But it is a narrow one.

The court did not award a fixed dollar amount yet. That number will come later, after billing records and fee requests are reviewed. For now, the decision gives Lively a path to recover some of what she spent defending herself against Baldoni’s claims.

The dispute has been messy, expensive, and public. It grew out of the breakdown around It Ends With Us, the 2024 film adaptation of Colleen Hoover’s bestselling novel. Lively starred in the movie. Baldoni directed it and also acted in it. What started as a major Hollywood release later turned into a legal fight involving harassment claims, retaliation claims, defamation claims, public relations accusations, and competing statements from both sides.

Now, one part of that fight has landed in Lively’s favor.

What the Judge Decided

The judge ruled that Lively may recover legal fees under a California law designed to protect people from retaliatory legal claims after they report sexual harassment or similar conduct.

The court found that Lively acted without proven malice when making protected claims. That was important because Baldoni’s defamation case had accused her of making false statements and damaging his reputation.

His defamation suit was dismissed. After that dismissal, Lively asked the court to award her legal costs and additional damages.

The judge split the decision.

Lively received:

• The right to seek attorney fees
• The right to seek related legal costs
• A ruling that she qualifies as a prevailing defendant on the relevant claim

Lively did not receive:

• Treble damages
• Punitive damages
• A wider damages award through this motion
• An immediate dollar amount

That last part matters. Headlines may say Baldoni must pay Lively’s legal fees, but the final amount still has to be worked out.

This is not the same as a jury verdict. It is not a finding that every claim Lively made was proven. It is a fee ruling tied to a dismissed defamation claim.

Still, in legal terms, it matters.

Why This Is Important

Legal fees in high-profile Hollywood cases can be huge. These cases involve large teams of lawyers, court filings, media strategy, discovery disputes, and months of work. Even when someone wins a motion, the cost of getting there can be serious.

That is why fee awards matter.

If a person is sued after making harassment-related claims, and the court later finds the lawsuit was retaliatory or legally improper, fee recovery can reduce the financial damage of having to defend against it.

That is the point of laws like the one applied here.

The court’s decision sends a clear message: if a defamation claim is dismissed in this kind of context, the person defending against it may be able to recover costs.

For Lively, that gives her side a financial and symbolic win. For Baldoni, it creates another cost after the collapse of his defamation case.

But again, the ruling is not total victory for either side. The court denied Lively’s request for broader damages. Baldoni’s team has used that part of the decision to argue that the ruling was limited.

Both sides are framing the outcome in their favor.

That is predictable.

How the Dispute Got Here

The fight began after the release and promotion of It Ends With Us. Lively later accused Baldoni and others of misconduct and retaliation. Baldoni denied wrongdoing and filed legal claims of his own, including defamation claims against Lively, her husband Ryan Reynolds, and others.

The legal fight became one of the most watched celebrity disputes in Hollywood. It was not just about one film. It became a battle over reputation, workplace conduct, media narratives, and who controlled the public story.

Baldoni’s side argued that Lively and her team damaged him through false accusations and a coordinated campaign. Lively’s side argued that she was speaking out about misconduct and retaliation.

The court dismissed Baldoni’s defamation claims. That dismissal opened the door for Lively to seek legal fees.

Now, the latest ruling gives her that opening.

What This Does Not Mean

This is where the reporting needs to stay clean.

The court’s ruling does not mean every accusation in the wider dispute has been fully proven. It also does not mean Lively received all the money she requested. The judge rejected her attempt to get extra damages through this motion.

So the simple version is this:

Lively won fees. She did not win additional damages here.

That distinction is important.

A legal fee ruling is about who pays for part of the litigation. A damages ruling is about compensation or punishment beyond those costs. The judge allowed the first and denied the second.

That makes the ruling meaningful, but limited.

The Stakes for Both Sides

For Lively, this ruling gives her legal team a strong public point. They can say the court recognized her right to recover fees after defending against a dismissed claim. That matters in a case where reputation is part of the battlefield.

For Baldoni, the ruling adds pressure. Even if the damages request was denied, paying another side’s legal fees can be expensive. His team has pushed back by stressing that the court did not award the broader damages Lively wanted.

The case also carries career stakes.

Both actors are public figures. Both are tied to a film that was already a major cultural property before the legal battle took over the conversation. The longer the dispute stays in headlines, the more it shapes how audiences and studios talk about them.

Hollywood watches these cases closely. Not because every private dispute matters to the industry. But because public legal fights can affect casting, partnerships, financing, publicity, and brand trust.

The Bigger Hollywood Lesson

This case shows how quickly a film’s story can move from box office coverage to courtroom coverage.

It Ends With Us was supposed to be discussed as a romantic drama based on a popular novel. Instead, the public conversation shifted toward conflict between its lead actress and director.

That is not rare anymore. Modern Hollywood disputes do not stay inside court filings. They spill into trade outlets, social media, podcasts, newsletters, and fan communities. Every motion becomes a headline. Every statement gets pulled apart.

That makes legal strategy and public strategy hard to separate.

For celebrities, that is dangerous. A legal win may not feel like a public win. A public win may not hold up in court. A partial win can be sold as total victory by one side and a failure by the other.

That is what is happening here.

Bottom Line

Blake Lively won an important ruling. She can seek attorney fees and costs from Justin Baldoni tied to his dismissed defamation claims. But the judge did not award her punitive damages or treble damages through this motion.

So the result is clear:

Lively gets a fee win. Baldoni avoids the bigger damages request. The legal fight narrows, but the fallout continues.

The next key question is money. How much will the court allow Lively to recover? That depends on billing records, legal arguments, and the judge’s review.

For now, the case remains a high-profile example of how expensive and damaging Hollywood legal battles can become once a film dispute leaves the set and enters federal court.

SWinxy, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons