Justin Baldoni’s Lawyers Accuse Blake Lively of Seeking 'an End Run' Around a Jury Trial in Latest Legal Showdown

Elizabeth RosnerTue, June 2, 2026 at 8:29 PM UTC

0

Credit: John Nacion/Getty; ANGELA WEISS / AFP via Getty -

Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni remain in a legal dispute despite settling the broader lawsuit before trial

The case hinges on whether Lively can seek damages under a California anti-retaliation law protecting public speech on misconduct

Judge Lewis J. Liman told the parties the matter was "under advisement" and indicated he would issue a decision at a later date

The legal battle between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni may have settled, but the two sides remain locked in a dispute over whether the actress can pursue attorneys' fees and damages under a California anti-retaliation law.

During a hearing in federal court in Manhattan on Monday, June 1, attorneys for both parties sparred over California Civil Code Section 47.1, which protects people who publicly speak about alleged sexual assault, harassment or misconduct from retaliatory lawsuits.

As the reported, Baldoni's attorney, Ellyn Garofalo, argued that Lively is attempting to obtain damages through the statute despite agreeing to settle the broader case before it reached trial.

Garofalo told Judge Lewis J. Liman that Lively was seeking "an end run" around a trial that was canceled when the parties resolved the lawsuit.

Baldoni's attorney said the case was resolved without his client or his production company "paying a cent of the $300 million in damages she was demanding."

Lively's attorney, Mike Gottlieb, pushed back, arguing that the issue stems from legal arguments Baldoni's team previously made before the settlement.

According to Gottlieb, Baldoni's side had asked the court to apply California law to the dispute and should now be bound by that position.

"They asked this court to apply substantive California law — now it has to apply 47.1," Gottlieb said.

Advertisement

At one point, Liman suggested Lively could effectively end the dispute by abandoning her request for relief under the statute.

"Your client has the ability to end this by saying, I'm not seeking — I'm not telling you to do that, this is an interesting legal question," the judge told Gottlieb.

The attorney maintained that the court must still determine how the law applies.

The dispute centers on who bears the burden of proof under Section 47.1 and whether Lively may seek attorneys' fees, costs and potentially additional damages under the statute following the settlement.

Liman did not issue a ruling from the bench.

Instead, after hearing arguments from both sides, the judge concluded the proceeding by telling the attorneys that the matter was "under advisement," signaling he will issue a written decision at a later date.

The ruling could determine whether any portion of the high-profile legal fight continues despite the settlement that ended the broader lawsuit.

on People

Original Article on Source

Source: “AOL Entertainment”