Blake Lively claims she suffered $64M financial fallout from dispute with Justin Baldoni

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA: Actress Blake Lively is alleging significant financial and reputational harm arising from ongoing legal dispute with her 'It Ends With Us' co-star Justin Baldoni, according to recent court filings.

Lively and her legal team argue that statements and alleged coordinated actions during the conflict have caused major damage to her career and public image. The matter is now part of a wider legal battle set to proceed to trial on May 18. 

Blake Lively attends the 2025 Time100 Gala at Lincoln Center on April 24, 2025 in New York City. (Photo by Taylor Hill/FilmMagic) 

Blake Lively’s claim of extensive reputational and financial harm

In Lively’s memorandum opposing Wayfarer Studios’ motion in limine, filed on Friday, April 17, her expert Dr. Ashlee Humphreys, a professor of marketing communications at Northwestern University, made certain allegations regarding the case.

According to EOnline, she alleged that Baldoni’s use of the retaliatory phrases “tone deaf,” “bully,” and “mean girl” during the alleged smear campaign against her generated 176,738,781 impressions, valued at approximately $36.5 to $40.5 million.

The filing also alleged that “retaliatory statements” made by 'It Ends With Us' director’s attorney Bryan Freedman during the legal battle generated 116,959,530 impressions. These were calculated to amount to $24,375,267 in estimated damages.

Humphreys provided the calculation for reputational harm damages by quantifying the reach of the alleged phrases and statements. She identified “the number of impressions providing the basis for each” and calculated “particular dollar damages.”

For Baldoni’s part, he argued in his opposition to Lively’s memorandum, filed on April 20, that her reputation predated their legal dispute. He claimed that labels such as “mean girl,” “bully,” “difficult to work with,” and “tone deaf,” which were referenced in the alleged smear campaign, “did not cause further harm to her existing reputation.”

The filing further alleged that such claims “were widely circulated before Lively encountered” Baldoni and his associates. His filing also claimed that she “plans to ask the jury for tens of millions of dollars in damages” based on allegations that his actions “tarnished her previously ‘sterling’ reputation.” It further stated that evidence would show she had already soured her own reputation prior to their legal battle.

Judge dismisses several claims from Lively’s lawsuit as trial moves forward

Earlier this month, a New York judge dismissed 10 of Lively’s 13 allegations against Baldoni and his associates. However, the actress continues to pursue claims of retaliation, breach of contract, and aiding and abetting retaliation during the trial beginning May 18, according to an April 2 order.

Although the judge dismissed her allegations of harassment, he noted that regarding the claims of a smear campaign, there is “some direct evidence that the plan to destroy Lively and her career was put into action.”

The judge further wrote, “The parties fiercely dispute the extent to which the backlash against her was ‘organic’ or ‘artificial,’ and which steps the Wayfarer Parties may have taken to protect themselves (versus which ones they may have taken to destroy Lively personally and her career). A jury can and should decide those questions.”

Four months after the film adaptation of Colleen Hoover’s book debuted in theatres, Lively had filed a California Civil Rights Department (CRD) complaint against Baldoni and his associates on December 20, according to The New York Times.

Lively alleged in her complaint that Baldoni and his Wayfarer associates “embarked on a sophisticated press and digital plan in retaliation” for her voicing concerns about purported misconduct on set, adding that she and other cast and crew members “experienced invasive, unwelcome, unprofessional and inappropriate behavior” by Baldoni and CEO Jamey Heath.

The complaint includes accusations of harassment, retaliation, failure to investigate, prevent and/or remedy harassment, aiding and abetting harassment and retaliation, breach of contract, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, false light invasion of privacy, and interference with prospective economic advantage.