The $60 Million Legal Fight Rumors: What’s Really Going On With Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni

Thought this saga was wrapped? Not quite. After Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni said on Monday they’d settled their very public court fight, Lively turned around on Thursday with a new filing tied to that settlement — and both sides immediately started declaring victory. Also floating around: a report claiming the legal bills hit $60 million. Lively’s lawyer didn’t confirm that number, but did lean into why this got so pricey.

The quick version

• December 2024: Lively, 38, sues Baldoni and his Wayfarer Studios for sexual harassment, retaliation, breach of contract, and more.
• January 2025: Baldoni countersues.
• June 2025: His countersuit is dismissed.
• Last month: A judge throws out 10 of Lively’s 13 claims — including sexual harassment.
• Monday, May 4: The 'It Ends With Us' costars announce they’ve reached a settlement.
• Thursday, May 7: Lively files a request for damages as part of that settlement, arguing Baldoni, 42, should pay under California Civil Code Section 47.1, a law her team says protects people who report sexual harassment from retaliatory defamation lawsuits.

About that $60 million headline

Entertainment Tonight asked Lively’s lawyer Sigrid McCawley about a Page Six report claiming Lively and Baldoni burned through $60 million on this fight. McCawley didn’t validate the figure, but she did say cases like this are expensive — and pointed to the California statute Lively is invoking as a reason those costs shouldn’t scare people out of speaking up. She argued the law is meant to block what she called the weaponizing of lawsuits against people who report harassment, and added that most folks can’t afford a drawn-out battle like this. In her words:

'This law stops people from weaponizing the legal system against the individuals who report things like sexual harassment.'

So why file something after a settlement?

It sounds contradictory, but it isn’t unusual. Lively’s new request is a specific ask for damages tied to that California statute (Section 47.1). Her attorneys say Baldoni filed a retaliatory lawsuit after she spoke up and that the law lets the court make him — and, they argue, the other individual defendants — personally pay for using the courts to punish her.

Two very different victory laps

Lively’s attorneys Michael Gottlieb and Esra Hudson framed the settlement like this: because Baldoni and the other individual defendants agreed to settle and gave up their right to appeal, they now face personal liability for trying to silence and intimidate her. They also claimed the defendants acknowledged Lively’s concerns 'deserved to be heard,' which, in their view, ends the narrative that she made it all up.

Baldoni’s attorney Bryan Freedman gave the exact opposite read. He called the settlement a 'win and total victory' for Baldoni and Wayfarer, said Lively voluntarily dismissed the three claims that were still headed to trial, and argued they only settled because her side knew they were going to lose in court. He also said the only thing still on the judge’s plate is a narrow fees issue that has been pending since September 2025. Later, speaking again to ET, Freedman brushed off Lively’s new filing as 'more nonsense' and suggested she won’t take responsibility for her role in all this.

What’s actually left?

The big-ticket trial is off the calendar because of the settlement. What remains is Lively’s request for damages under California Civil Code Section 47.1 — essentially a fight over whether Baldoni and others owe money for what her team calls a retaliatory lawsuit. Baldoni’s side says it’s a leftover technical matter; Lively’s side says it puts the defendants on the hook personally. Translation: one more round of filings before the credits roll.