Following a lengthy 24-hour period filled with motions to dismiss, allegations of misconduct, and refusals to stay proceedings, the legal battle between the stars of It Ends With Us, Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni, has escalated to Def Con One, as per attorney Bryan Freedman.
Freedman criticized Lively’s recent motion to extricate herself from the situation she allegedly created, describing it as a reprehensible misuse of the legal system. This statement followed her filing in federal court on March 20, seeking to dismiss the ongoing legal matters.
Lively, along with her husband Ryan Reynolds, the New York Times, and PR executive Leslie Sloane, are attempting to exit Baldoni’s $400 million defamation and extortion lawsuit. The suit alleges sexual harassment and claims that Lively and her legal representation are invoking a 2023 California law that could prevent Baldoni from pursuing his claims.
As of now, no discussions of a settlement are occurring, and the high-profile case is still scheduled to be heard in New York City on March 9, 2026. Freedman, representing Baldoni and executives at Wayfarer Studios, contests Lively’s arguments for dismissal.
Freedman emphasized that protective legal measures exist to safeguard individuals and afford them proper defense opportunities. He accused Lively of distorting the legal process to suit her agenda while asserting that her allegations—such as false harassment claims against his clients—will be thoroughly disproven during the discovery phase of the proceedings.
In a recent court session, Judge Lewis J. Liman rejected a request from Sloane to temporarily halt the discovery process. Freedman elaborated on a strategic decision made by his clients to provide straightforward responses to Lively’s amended complaint, instead of seeking dismissals.
Additionally, in a development from Thursday, a new lawsuit emerged. After suing Baldoni, publicist Stephanie Jones is now facing a counter-suit from her former colleague Abel and ex-client. Abel’s countersuit outlines how Jones allegedly mishandled communications and rights under California labor laws, which are now central to the ongoing saga.
