{"id":260565,"date":"2026-08-28T14:25:12","date_gmt":"2026-08-28T14:25:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/entertainment.runfyers.com\/index.php\/2026\/08\/28\/blake-lively-awarded-400k-in-legal-fees-from-justin-baldoni-after-8m-request-national-globalnews-ca\/"},"modified":"2026-08-28T14:25:12","modified_gmt":"2026-08-28T14:25:12","slug":"blake-lively-awarded-400k-in-legal-fees-from-justin-baldoni-after-8m-request-national-globalnews-ca","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/entertainment.runfyers.com\/index.php\/2026\/08\/28\/blake-lively-awarded-400k-in-legal-fees-from-justin-baldoni-after-8m-request-national-globalnews-ca\/","title":{"rendered":"Blake Lively awarded $400K in legal fees from Justin Baldoni after $8M request – National | Globalnews.ca"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n<\/p>\n

\n

Blake Lively<\/a> will receive just over US$400,000 of the $8 million she sought<\/a> in legal costs from Justin Baldoni<\/a> after they settled their legal battle over the production of their 2024 film,\u00a0It Ends With Us<\/em>.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Judge Lewis J. Liman explained in a written decision<\/a>, obtained by Global News, why Lively was not entitled to the full amount that her lawyers claim she spent after Baldoni and his production company, Wayfarer Studios LLC, filed their own claims in response to her December 2024 lawsuit.<\/p>\n

Liman wrote that Lively and Baldoni had \u201cwaged fierce battle against each other in court,\u201d and denied Lively the bulk of legal fees she sought.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Click
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

He cited the limits of a California law designed to protect survivors of sexual harassment and discrimination from retaliatory lawsuits.<\/p>\n

\n

Story continues below advertisement<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

The law meant to protect sex abuse survivors from legal actions designed to intimidate and silence victims could only be construed to let her be reimbursed for what she paid lawyers to defend against defamation claims rather than all claims Baldoni made against her, Liman wrote.<\/p>\n

Lively\u2019s lawyers previously disclosed an amount of $7,495, 526.87 in lawyer fees from two law firms that represented her and $539,514.01 in other expenses with 7,070.20 hours billed by 82 timekeepers in\u00a0a legal filing<\/a>, obtained by Global News.<\/p>\n

In his ruling, Liman wrote, \u201cLively seeks attorneys\u2019 fees for 82 timekeepers, including 53 from Willkie and 29 from Manatt. But she includes biographical information, title, and billing rate information for only 11 timekeepers. Id. The Court has no basis to evaluate the fee request for the remaining timekeepers and therefore denies it.\u00a0The number of hours for which Lively seeks reimbursement is unreasonable.\u201d<\/p>\n

He noted that Lively did not submit the invoices for her legal representatives.<\/p>\n

The\u00a0Gossip Girl\u00a0<\/em>actor was also denied costs, including fees of experts not ordered by the court, investigation expenses in preparing the case for trial, postage, telephone and photocopying charges, except for exhibits, costs in investigation of jurors and transcripts of court proceedings not ordered by the court.<\/p>\n

Lively is entitled to $363,245 in attorneys\u2019 fees and $44,206 in costs, the judge ruled.<\/p>\n

\n

Story continues below advertisement<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

In a statement to The Associated Press, lawyer Bryan Freedman, representing Baldoni, called the ruling a \u201csignificant victory for my clients\u201d that will leave Lively with less than five per cent of the amount she initially requested in legal fees.<\/p>\n

\n
\n\t\t\t\t\"Get\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n
\n

Get daily National news<\/h2>\n

Get daily Canada news delivered to your inbox so you’ll never miss the day’s top stories.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

He said in a statement that it also \u201csends a clear message that, no matter how powerful you may be, the courtroom is not a place to take advantage of the law for your own personal gain.\u201d<\/p>\n

Lawyers Esra Hudson and Michael Gottlieb, representing Lively, said in a statement that Liman\u2019s decision was \u201chistoric\u201d because it was the first time under California law that money was awarded. They said it showed \u201cthere are real consequences of bringing retaliatory lawsuits.\u201d<\/p>\n

The lawyers added that Lively had \u201clifted the curtain for other victims, and set the precedent for others to come forward and expose similar conduct.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Click
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

Last month, Baldoni asked Liman to deny or \u201csubstantially reduce\u201d<\/a> Lively\u2019s \u201cexcessive\u201d request for $8 million in legal fees.<\/p>\n

\n

Story continues below advertisement<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

In\u00a0the legal filing<\/a>, obtained by Global News, Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios referred to Lively\u2019s request as \u201canything but a typical fee motion.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cLively claims that she is entitled to a stunning $7,495,526 in attorney\u2019s fees for 7,070.20 hours billed by no fewer than 82 timekeepers, to obtain the dismissal of a single defamation claim at the pleading stage. In contrast, The New York Times is seeking $181,000 in a fee request filed in state court for its motion to dismiss precisely the same defamation claim,\u201d Baldoni\u2019s lawyers wrote in the legal filing.<\/p>\n

Baldoni\u2019s legal team was referencing the New York Times seeking $181,000 in lawyer fees to dismiss the same defamation claim after Baldoni sued the newspaper for libel<\/a>, over accusations that he engaged in a \u201csmear campaign\u201d against Lively but the lawsuit was dismissed in June 2025.<\/p>\n

In the legal filing, Baldoni\u2019s lawyers Ellyn S. Garofalo and Freedman said that Lively \u201ccould not possibly have spent over 7,000 hours preparing the portion of the motion to dismiss directed to Wayfarer\u2019s defamation claim.\u201d<\/p>\n

His legal team noted that the court \u201chas discretion to exclude time that is excessive, redundant or otherwise unnecessary.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cLively does not provide billing statements or other records to support her $7.5 million demand, much less allocate fees to her defense of Wayfarer\u2019s defamation claim,\u201d the filing added.<\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\t