Blake Lively scores WME backing as judge trims Baldoni’s claims before trial

A federal judge has removed a major piece of Blake Lively’s lawsuit against Justin Baldoni, narrowing the case just weeks before it goes to trial — but the dispute is far from over. With a May trial date set in New York, Lively’s remaining claims now center on allegations of online attacks and efforts to silence her, drawing a high-profile agency into the spotlight.

Judge Lewis Liman dismissed Lively’s sexual harassment claim this week, ruling that California employment protections do not apply because she worked on the film as an independent contractor and the court lacks jurisdiction to press those state-law claims. The decision leaves Lively’s federal causes of action — notably claims of defamation and retaliation — intact and makes the alleged digital campaign to discredit her the focal point of the upcoming trial.

The trial is scheduled to begin on May 18 in federal court in Manhattan. Court filings show Lively seeks damages tied to a broader pattern she says aimed to wreck her reputation after she raised complaints during production of the Sony-distributed drama.

WME, the agency that represents Lively, issued a robust statement of support this week, framing her decision to pursue the case as a stand against industry pressure to stay silent. The agency characterized the litigation as exposing “covert digital takedown campaigns” meant to intimidate and discredit people who speak up, and said Lively and her family have its full backing as the matter proceeds to trial.

Justin Baldoni, his production company Wayfarer Studios, and members of the film’s communications team are named defendants. Baldoni was dropped by his former agency late last year, days after Lively’s initial complaint became public.

Read also  Zendaya's The Drama expected to wow viewers: Tom Holland says premiere will be unforgettable

Where the case stands now

The plaintiff originally filed a multi-count complaint with the California Civil Rights Department on December 10, 2024, alleging sexual harassment and a coordinated effort to damage her reputation. That harassment claim was moved out of the suit in federal court this month; Lively’s legal team has signaled it will press forward on the remaining counts.

  • Complaint filed: December 10, 2024 (California Civil Rights Department)
  • Key legal change: Sexual harassment claim dismissed in federal court for lack of jurisdiction under California law
  • Remaining claims: Defamation and retaliation tied to alleged online smear campaigns
  • Trial date: May 18 (federal court, Manhattan)
  • Possible witnesses: Blake Lively, Justin Baldoni, Ryan Reynolds — and tentatively others near the parties

Beyond the narrow legal rulings, the case has become a proxy for wider debates about how the entertainment industry handles accusations and how reputations are shaped online. Lively’s lawyers argue the core harm arose from an orchestrated effort across social media and press channels; defendants have pushed back, including contesting discovery and procedural matters in court.

Attorneys on both sides are preparing for live testimony. Sources close to the case expect the principal actors — Lively and Baldoni — to take the stand, and say Ryan Reynolds, who is married to Lively, is likely to testify as well. Lists of potential witnesses filed with the court also include well-known friends and colleagues, though their participation has not been confirmed.

Legal observers note the practical implications: while the dismissal of the harassment count narrows the legal theories available to Lively, the trial could still deliver reputational and financial consequences depending on how jurors weigh the defamation and retaliation claims. A settlement remains possible, and either side could seek to resolve the dispute before opening statements.

For now, the spotlight is on the May proceedings and on how federal courts handle disputes that mix workplace allegations with cross-jurisdictional questions and disputes about online conduct. The outcome may influence how studios, agents, and PR teams respond to similar complaints in the future.

Similar Posts

Rate this post

Leave a Comment

Share to...