Blake Lively Wins $363k in Legal Fees After Justin Baldoni Claims

On June 26, a Los Angeles judge awarded Blake Lively **$363,245.40** in attorneys’ fees and an additional **$44,206.35** in costs from former “It Ends With Us” co‑star Justin Baldoni.

The decision came after Lively’s lawsuit alleged that Baldoni sexually harassed her on the set of the film, and she sought more than **$8 million** in legal expenses. The court deemed the fee request “outrageously unreasonable,” granting only a fraction of the amount demanded.

Lively’s attorneys, Esra Hudson and Michael Gottlieb, released a statement underscoring that the case was about accountability, not money. Baldoni’s lawyer, Bryan Freedman, noted that the ruling affirmed the strength of California’s Section 47.1 law against retaliatory litigation.

The settlement was finalized in May, with both parties agreeing to pay no money; however, their legal teams reportedly earned **$60 million** combined through the process.

## Background & Context

Blake Lively first rose to prominence as a leading cast member on the television series **“Gossip Girl,”** and she has since built a successful film career that includes roles in **“The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants,”** **“The Shallows,”** and the more recent **“It Ends With Us.”** Justin Baldoni, known for his work on “Jane the Virgin” and as a director‑actor with **“It Ends With Us,”** has been active in both acting and directing since the mid‑2000s.

The lawsuit was filed early in 2024, following allegations that Baldoni made unwanted advances on Lively during production of the 2023 film.

California law’s Section 47.1 provides for attorneys’ fees to be awarded to the prevailing party in certain civil cases, a statute that has been increasingly invoked in workplace‑harassment disputes across the state.

The judge’s decision hinged on whether Lively’s fee claim fell within the scope of this statute, ultimately ruling it exceeded statutory limits.

Both parties had previously settled disputes over alleged harassment and misconduct, setting a precedent for how such claims are addressed in Los Angeles courts.

In 2019, Baldoni faced a separate lawsuit that was dismissed after a settlement agreement was reached; meanwhile, Lively had successfully defended herself against a defamation claim brought by an industry insider in 2021.

## The Legal Mechanics of Section 47.1

Section 47.1 applies to civil actions where the defendant is a “public office holder” or “private entity” engaged in public service.

In practice, it allows the prevailing party to recover **reasonable attorneys’ fees** from the losing side, provided the claim is **non‑contested** and the fee request is “reasonable.” The Los Angeles Superior Court judge interpreted “reasonable” in a narrow sense, noting that an $8 million demand exceeded what is typically considered standard for a harassment case.

This interpretation aligns with recent rulings where courts have scrutinized exorbitant fee claims, balancing the need to compensate litigants with the potential deterrent effect of discouraging frivolous or exaggerated litigation.

## What People Are Saying

Lively’s legal team highlighted that the case exposed a broader industry pattern of covert online smear campaigns targeting women. They emphasized that the award was historic as it demonstrated real consequences for bringing retaliatory lawsuits to court.

Baldoni’s counsel framed the outcome as a “significant victory” for his client, noting that the judge’s refusal to grant the excessive fee request reaffirmed the court’s role in safeguarding legal integrity.

Ryan Reynolds, Lively’s husband, celebrated her 39th birthday on social media with a carousel of photos, praising her as “the very best human I know.” The couple’s public statements underscored their personal support for each other amid the lawsuit’s publicity.

### Fan Reaction

Fans flooded Lively’s Instagram stories with supportive messages, many . A popular fan account noted, “It’s not about money; it’s about standing up against harassment.” In contrast, a segment of the audience praised Baldoni for his “victory” and urged viewers to respect the court’s decision.

### Industry Impact

Industry insiders view the ruling as a double‑edged sword. On one hand, it reaffirms that harassment claims can lead to significant legal scrutiny and deterrence. On the other, the limited fee award signals that parties must be realistic about the financial scope of their demands or risk a punitive ruling.

The decision is likely to influence how future sexual harassment claims are litigated, especially regarding attorneys’ fees under California law.

Some legal scholars predict an uptick in pre‑trial settlements to avoid protracted fee disputes, while others caution that this could dampen legitimate claims if plaintiffs fear limited compensation.

## What Happens Next

Under the terms of the settlement, neither Lively nor Baldoni received monetary compensation; however, both sides’ attorneys earned significant fees. Lively has announced plans to return to Hollywood projects after a brief hiatus, signaling her intent to continue her acting career.

Baldoni and his wife expressed gratitude for supporters who followed the case, indicating they wanted the judicial process to proceed without additional public commentary.

The court’s judgment marks the final legal resolution of this particular claim, leaving Lively poised to resume her career while the broader entertainment community reflects on the evolving standards for addressing harassment allegations.

## A Broader View of Workplace Safety

The settlement underscores a growing industry focus on workplace safety. In the years since the #MeToo movement first gained traction, studios and production companies have adopted stricter harassment policies, including mandatory reporting mechanisms and training programs.

Actors like Lively, who have become vocal advocates for safer set environments, are now part of a larger dialogue that includes unions, guilds, and producers.

Her case serves as a cautionary tale: while the legal system can provide recourse, the real battle often lies in cultural change—ensuring that every crew member feels respected and protected.

## Looking Forward

As Lively prepares to return to acting roles, she has expressed a commitment to fostering safer workplace environments moving forward. Baldoni, too, has stated his willingness to engage in industry conversations about appropriate conduct and respectful collaboration.

The limited attorneys’ fee award may serve as a benchmark for future cases, potentially curbing inflated fee demands while still recognizing the effort and resources expended by plaintiffs.

For the entertainment community, the outcome is a reminder that accountability can come through both the courtroom and the collective will to uphold ethical standards on set.

In an era where public scrutiny is intense and the stakes are high, this case exemplifies how legal mechanisms, fan support, and industry policy intersect to shape outcomes for all parties involved.