Blake Lively Seeks $8 Million in Attorney Fees From Justin Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios

Blake Lively is seeking just over $8 million in legal costs from Justin Baldoni in the aftermath of their It Ends With Us dispute, with court filings asking for $7,495,526.87 in attorney’s fees and $539,514.01 in other costs.

In the same filing, Lively’s attorneys argued that Baldoni’s $400-million US defamation lawsuit was “This gross abuse of the legal system was not meant to win in court — its aim was to retaliate against Lively by falsely branding her a liar, intimidating witnesses and the media, and discouraging others from speaking out,” and they described “scorched-earth litigation tactics designed to drain Lively’s resources.”

20Minutos

The dispute traces back to Lively’s December 2024 lawsuit accusing Baldoni, her co-star and director, and Wayfarer Studios of conspiring with publicists to pre-emptively destroy her reputation after she privately accused him of sexual harassment on the It Ends With Us set.

CBC reported that Lively and Baldoni agreed to end their legal battle last month, two weeks before a trial was set to begin regarding Lively’s claims about a supposed effort to damage her public reputation and credibility.

The Hollywood Reporter said the case settled last month with no payout to the actress, while a federal judge earlier this month denied her bid for damages but found she’s entitled to recover her lawyer fees.

NBC News said U.S. District Judge Lewis J. Liman tossed out most of Lively’s claims earlier this year, including harassment, defamation and conspiracy, and the two parties reached a settlement deal in May.

NBC News also reported that Liman dismissed Baldoni’s defamation and extortion lawsuit against Lively last year but said she was allowed to move forward with a request for financial damages under California Civil Code Section 47.1.

6abc Philadelphia

In the fee fight, Lively’s attorneys said the law requires reimbursement for the defense because the legal work on the various claims was intertwined, and they argued she is entitled to recover approximately $7,495,526.87 in attorneys’ fees and another $539,514.01 in litigation expenses.

The Hollywood Reporter quoted a spokesperson for the actress saying, “Thanks to this landmark decision, those considering using a lawsuit as a weapon of intimidation have been put on notice that there are consequences for doing so,” and it said the ask for $8 million represents her bill from beating Baldoni’s defamation lawsuit across six months in early 2025.

CBC further detailed that the filing said Esra Hudson of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips and Michael Gottlieb of Willkie Farr & Gallagher gave Lively discounts, with Gottlieb stating he charged her an average hourly rate of $2,187.

The Guardian reported that Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios have until 13 July to decide whether to agree to pay Lively’s $8m costs or challenge her claim, after a federal judge ruled this June that Lively was “entitled to fees and costs.”

People said Judge Lewis J. Liman ordered Baldoni, 42, and Wayfarer Studios to respond by July 13, after which he will determine whether to award the full amount, reduce it or deny portions of the request altogether.

People also said Lively is seeking $8,035,040.88 in attorneys’ fees and litigation costs, including $7,495,526.87 in attorneys’ fees and $539,514.01 in litigation costs and expenses incurred during the “successful defense of the Wayfarer Action.”

Variety reported that Lively’s attorneys described their work as “comprehensive and necessary to achieve the complete win that was secured,” and it said the request comes after Liman agreed earlier this month that Lively should receive attorney fees under a 2023 California law meant to protect sexual abuse accusers from retaliatory defamation suits.

In the background of the fee application, Variety said Lively dropped her lawsuit against Baldoni, Wayfarer, and others on the eve of trial in May, while Baldoni’s defamation suit was dismissed last year after a judge ruled that Lively’s allegations were protected by litigation privilege.