In a heated escalation of their ongoing legal battle, actress Blake Lively has pushed back against Justin Baldoni's motion to dismiss her lawsuit, citing a recent federal appeals court ruling to argue that her claims deserve a full hearing. The 38-year-old star, known for her role as Lily Bloom in the 2024 film adaptation of Colleen Hoover's novel It Ends With Us, filed a letter with the court on Thursday, March 12, emphasizing that dismissing the case now would undermine justice given the evidence already collected. Lively's legal team referenced a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which stated earlier this week that cases should not be thrown out based solely on the wording of a complaint if supporting evidence exists, according to reports from People magazine.
The dispute stems from Lively's allegations of a toxic work environment on the set of It Ends With Us, where Baldoni, 42, served as both director and co-star. In December 2024, Lively lodged a complaint with the California Civil Rights Department, accusing Baldoni of fostering hostility through sexual harassment and launching a smear campaign against her. She followed this with a formal lawsuit seeking more than $160 million in damages, claiming the actions severely impacted her professional and personal life. Baldoni has vehemently denied these accusations, maintaining that Lively's claims lack merit.
Baldoni's response included a countersuit against Lively, which was ultimately dismissed by the court in June 2025. Undeterred, he filed a motion to dismiss Lively's suit in November 2025, arguing in court documents that she "cannot prove any actionable sexual harassment." Lively's recent letter directly counters this, asserting that the gathered evidence—from witness statements to production records—warrants proceeding to trial. "Dismissing Lively’s case at this point 'would hardly serve the efficient or just resolution of disputes' if evidence can support her allegations," the letter stated, drawing on the Second Circuit's precedent to bolster her position.
The case has drawn significant attention in Hollywood, highlighting broader issues of workplace conduct in the entertainment industry. It Ends With Us, which explores themes of domestic abuse, became a box office success despite the behind-the-scenes turmoil, grossing over $300 million worldwide upon its August 2024 release. However, production was marred by reported tensions, including creative differences and allegations of inappropriate behavior. Lively has publicly described the set as increasingly uncomfortable, while Baldoni's team has portrayed her complaints as an attempt to exert control over the project.
Efforts to resolve the matter outside of court have so far failed. Last month, U.S. District Judge Lewis J. Liman, who is presiding over the case in New York federal court, suggested a settlement hearing in an attempt to avoid a lengthy trial. The hearing took place, but Baldoni's attorney, Bryan Freedman, told Deadline that the talks were "unsuccessful." Freedman added a note of cautious optimism, saying, "there’s always a chance" for a deal, though he expressed uncertainty about whether negotiations would resume. He concluded by stating he is "looking forward" to the trial, scheduled to begin on May 18.
The trial date was originally set for earlier this year but was postponed by Judge Liman due to his commitments to impending criminal trials. "As important as this case is … criminal trials take precedent," the judge explained during a previous hearing, underscoring the demands of the federal docket. This delay has given both sides additional time to prepare, with discovery already yielding a substantial record of depositions, emails, and other documents that Lively's team argues substantiate her claims.
Legal experts following the case have noted the significance of the Second Circuit ruling in Lively's favor. The appeals court's decision, issued just days before her letter, involved a similar employment discrimination suit where early dismissal was overturned because evidentiary materials had been submitted. Lively's attorneys argued that the same logic applies here, preventing what they see as an premature end to the proceedings. Baldoni's camp has not yet responded publicly to the letter, though Us Weekly reached out to his team for comment without immediate reply.
Background on the feud reveals a pattern of escalating conflicts during the film's production in New York City and New Jersey in 2023. Lively, who also served as a producer, reportedly clashed with Baldoni over script changes and marketing decisions. Her complaint to the California Civil Rights Department detailed specific incidents, including unwanted physical contact and retaliatory actions after she raised concerns about intimacy coordinators and scene alterations. Baldoni, in his countersuit—filed alongside his production company Wayfarer Studios—alleged that Lively engaged in bullying and interference, claims that the court rejected in its June 2025 dismissal.
Despite the legal wrangling, both actors have moved forward with their careers. Lively starred in the thriller A Simple Favor sequel in 2025, while Baldoni has focused on directing projects through his studio. The lawsuit's publicity has reignited discussions about power dynamics on film sets, especially in adaptations addressing sensitive topics like abuse. Industry observers point to parallels with other high-profile cases, such as those involving Harvey Weinstein or recent #MeToo revelations, though Lively and Baldoni's dispute remains more contained to interpersonal and professional grievances.
As the May 18 trial approaches, both parties are bracing for intense scrutiny. Judge Liman has indicated a preference for resolution but is prepared to let the case proceed if necessary. The outcome could set precedents for handling harassment claims in collaborative creative environments, potentially influencing how studios address actor-director relationships. Lively's pursuit of over $160 million includes demands for compensatory and punitive damages, reflecting the alleged depth of harm to her reputation and career opportunities.
Baldoni's denial of the allegations has been consistent, with his legal filings emphasizing that any set tensions were mutual and not indicative of harassment. His team has argued that Lively's lawsuit is an overreach, possibly motivated by contractual disputes over the film's promotion. According to court records, Baldoni sought to seal certain documents during discovery to protect privacy, a request that was partially granted. Meanwhile, Lively's supporters, including some cast members who have spoken anonymously, have corroborated aspects of her account, describing a shift in atmosphere after her complaints surfaced.
The California Civil Rights Department's investigation into Lively's initial complaint remains ongoing, separate from the federal lawsuit. That probe could yield additional findings, potentially bolstering or challenging her civil claims. As of now, no criminal charges have been filed against Baldoni, and sources close to the matter indicate that the focus remains on the civil proceedings. The case's timeline, spanning from late 2024 filings to a 2026 trial, illustrates the protracted nature of such disputes in the public eye.
Looking ahead, the trial promises to unpack months of production emails, witness testimonies, and expert analyses on workplace standards. Freedman’s comments suggest Baldoni's readiness to defend vigorously, while Lively's letter signals her determination to see the evidence presented. With settlement possibilities lingering, the coming months will be pivotal for both stars' legacies in an industry still grappling with accountability. For now, the court battle continues, a stark contrast to the on-screen romance that captivated audiences.
This saga underscores the challenges of translating real-world issues into entertainment, where personal boundaries often blur with professional demands. As Hollywood evolves post-#MeToo, cases like Lively versus Baldoni serve as litmus tests for enforcement of protections. Stakeholders await Judge Liman's next rulings, which could either expedite a trial or open doors to mediation. Regardless, the dispute has already amplified voices calling for safer, more equitable sets.