A federal judge has officially brought an end to Justin Baldoni’s $400 million legal battle against his It Ends With Us co-star Blake Lively, her husband Ryan Reynolds, and The New York Times, closing the book on one of Hollywood’s most talked-about legal dramas of the year. The decision came on October 31, when U.S. District Court Judge Lewis Liman entered final judgment, effectively terminating the counter-lawsuit that Baldoni and his team had filed earlier this year. What began as a bitter and complicated dispute involving sexual harassment allegations, defamation claims, and accusations of extortion has now been legally silenced—though not without leaving deep marks on everyone involved.
According to Judge Liman’s final ruling, the court had given Baldoni and his team time to amend their complaint after the initial dismissal but they failed to do so. “On October 17, 2025, the Court issued an order directing the parties to show cause why final judgment should not be entered in this case,” the order stated. The judge noted that “the time for the Wayfarer Parties to file an amended complaint has lapsed,” clarifying that the plaintiffs had until October 24 to respond but did not. Interestingly, only Blake Lively’s legal team responded to the court’s order, while Baldoni’s side remained silent, essentially allowing the dismissal to become final. The judge’s tone made it clear that the time for extensions or excuses had long passed, marking the end of a high-stakes, highly publicized feud that began months earlier.
Baldoni’s lawsuit was filed on January 16, 2025, through his company Wayfarer Studios. The plaintiffs also included Wayfarer cofounder Steve Sarowitz, CEO Jamey Heath, crisis PR strategist Melissa Nathan, and publicist Jennifer Abel. Together, they accused Lively, Reynolds, and Lively’s longtime publicist Leslie Sloane of a laundry list of legal violations, including extortion, defamation, and invasion of privacy. The lawsuit also targeted The New York Times, alleging that its reporting on the controversy surrounding It Ends With Us was biased, coordinated, and damaging. Baldoni’s team claimed that the article had been part of a larger effort to ruin his reputation and harm his professional and financial standing.
However, Judge Liman’s dismissal of the case wasn’t exactly unexpected. Back in June, he had already granted a motion to dismiss the lawsuit filed by Lively’s attorneys, ruling that Baldoni’s claims simply didn’t hold up under legal scrutiny. The judge found that the accusations of civil extortion, defamation, and false light invasion of privacy lacked sufficient basis in law or fact. Although Baldoni was given the opportunity to file a second amended complaint by June 23, 2025, he failed to meet that deadline. By the time the October order was issued, the court viewed the dismissal as final. “The Wayfarer Parties did not do so,” Liman wrote, confirming that the dismissal “became final as of June 23, 2025, as to all parties.” In simple terms, Baldoni and his legal team had their chance to fight back—and they didn’t take it.
Blake Lively’s side, meanwhile, has treated the ruling as a complete vindication. Her attorneys released a sharp statement after the June dismissal, saying, “Today’s opinion is a total victory and a complete vindication for Blake Lively, along with those that Justin Baldoni and the Wayfarer Parties dragged into their retaliatory lawsuit, including Ryan Reynolds, Leslie Sloane, and The New York Times.” They added, “As we have said from day one, this ‘$400 million’ lawsuit was a sham, and the Court saw right through it.” The lawyers also made it clear that they weren’t done seeking accountability, promising to pursue attorneys’ fees, treble damages, and punitive damages against Baldoni, Sarowitz, Nathan, and the other Wayfarer associates who, as they put it, “perpetrated this abusive litigation.”
For The New York Times, which had been caught in the crossfire between the two Hollywood camps, the ruling also served as a reaffirmation of the paper’s journalistic integrity. A spokesperson for the publication, Charlie Stadtlander, directed reporters back to a previous statement made when the lawsuit was first dismissed. “We are grateful to the court for seeing the lawsuit for what it was: a meritless attempt to stifle honest reporting,” the statement read. “Our journalists went out and covered carefully and fairly a story of public importance, and the court recognized that the law is designed to protect just that sort of journalism. We will continue to stand up in court for our journalism and for our journalists when their work comes under attack.”
That statement echoed the sentiment that had been growing in public discussions since the lawsuit’s filing. To many, Baldoni’s case appeared to be less about justice and more about retaliation—a counterattack launched in the wake of serious accusations that had already shaken his public image. The situation first erupted in late December 2024, when Blake Lively filed her own lawsuit against Baldoni, accusing him of sexual harassment and inappropriate behavior during the filming of It Ends With Us. Her complaint outlined troubling experiences on set and alleged that the actor-director’s behavior created a hostile work environment. Two weeks later, Baldoni and his team responded with their own massive lawsuit, accusing Lively and her camp of defaming him and orchestrating what they called a “smear campaign.”
That filing sent shockwaves through Hollywood, not only because of the eye-popping $400 million figure attached to it, but because it dragged in major names like Ryan Reynolds and The New York Times. For months, the story played out across entertainment news outlets, with fans, legal analysts, and industry insiders weighing in on whether the case represented an abuse of the court system or a genuine attempt at self-defense by Baldoni. But by the time Judge Liman handed down his final decision, the narrative had become clear: the court saw little substance in Baldoni’s claims and no reason to allow the matter to continue.
For Baldoni, the outcome represents a significant blow, both professionally and personally. Once known for his uplifting and emotionally resonant projects—like the romantic drama Five Feet Apart—he has instead spent the past year entangled in controversy. What began as an ambitious adaptation of Colleen Hoover’s best-selling novel has turned into a real-life courtroom saga that has overshadowed any discussion of the film itself. The project, which once promised to highlight Baldoni’s growth as both an actor and filmmaker, is now forever linked with scandal, legal filings, and bitter accusations.
On the other hand, for Lively and Reynolds, the dismissal represents closure on a deeply uncomfortable chapter. The couple has largely avoided public comment throughout the legal ordeal, allowing their attorneys to handle statements. Still, those close to Lively say that the process has been emotionally taxing, with her legal team fighting to clear her name while maintaining her privacy. The court’s final decision effectively clears her and her husband of any wrongdoing alleged by Baldoni and his co-plaintiffs. Though Lively’s request for attorneys’ fees remains pending, the major battle has now been won, allowing her to refocus on her career and family.
The New York Times, for its part, emerged from the ordeal stronger, its reporting reaffirmed by the court’s stance. The judge’s dismissal of the defamation claim sends a broader message about press freedom and the legal protections afforded to journalists who report on matters of public concern. In an era where public figures frequently challenge media coverage through litigation, this ruling stands as another example of the courts siding with the First Amendment and protecting the role of investigative journalism.
Even so, the end of this legal saga doesn’t necessarily mean all wounds have healed. The public nature of the dispute, amplified by social media commentary and endless speculation, has left lasting reputational scars. Some Hollywood insiders have suggested that Baldoni’s professional relationships may be strained moving forward, particularly after naming such powerful industry figures in his lawsuit. Others believe he might take time away from the spotlight before making any attempt at a comeback.
For Lively and Reynolds, the ordeal has likely strengthened their image as a united front—one that’s willing to fight back against what they viewed as a baseless and damaging attack. Yet, the stress of having such personal allegations aired in public and dragged through court cannot be understated. Behind the polished statements and legal victories, these proceedings often come with heavy emotional costs.
The story of It Ends With Us—both as a film and as a behind-the-scenes controversy—has been aptly named. What was supposed to be a romantic drama about love, trauma, and healing has instead mirrored those very themes in its off-screen chaos. The movie’s release was overshadowed by the lawsuits, with audiences and media outlets focusing less on its storyline and more on the bitter dispute between its stars. What began as a collaboration between two respected figures in Hollywood turned into an all-out war that blurred the line between personal grievance and professional rivalry.
In the end, Judge Liman’s ruling doesn’t just end a lawsuit—it draws a line under a tumultuous saga that has captivated the entertainment world for months. While Baldoni retains the right to appeal, legal experts have pointed out that such appeals rarely succeed, especially after a court has dismissed a case for failure to state a claim and the plaintiffs have missed multiple opportunities to amend their complaint. For all practical purposes, this case is over, and the odds of it ever returning to court are minimal.
Still, Lively’s legal team continues to pursue attorneys’ fees, which could mean that Baldoni and his associates will face a substantial financial hit on top of the reputational damage. If the court sides with Lively on that issue, the plaintiffs may find themselves paying for what the defense has described as a “retaliatory and abusive” legal campaign. The outcome of that request could set an example for future high-profile cases where one party is accused of using litigation as a weapon rather than a shield.
As the dust settles, Hollywood watchers are left reflecting on how a film about emotional endurance turned into one of the industry’s most dramatic cautionary tales. It’s a reminder that fame, success, and reputation are fragile currencies in an industry built on perception. For Baldoni, the fallout may take years to recover from. For Lively, the judgment serves as validation after months of intense scrutiny and speculation. For The New York Times, it’s a victory for the press and a reaffirmation of the importance of truth in storytelling—even when the subjects of those stories are powerful or well-known.
The final judgment closes one of Hollywood’s messiest legal dramas in recent memory, but it also underscores how quickly creative partnerships can unravel when personal conflicts, allegations, and public narratives collide. What began as a film about difficult relationships and emotional closure ironically ended with both of its stars battling in courtrooms instead of on-screen. The judge’s ruling may have concluded the legal aspect of this saga, but the cultural and personal reverberations will likely continue to echo for some time.
Neither Baldoni nor representatives for Wayfarer Studios have issued any public comment since the ruling, leaving silence in place of the fiery rhetoric that once fueled this case. Similarly, Lively and Reynolds have not released personal statements, perhaps signaling a desire to move on quietly. And maybe that’s the most fitting conclusion of all—to end a story that has taken so many twists and turns with simple, unspoken finality. Because while the court’s decision ends the lawsuit, the broader story has already written its ending: one where reputation, truth, and resilience become the lasting legacies left behind after the credits roll.
In the world of Hollywood, where fiction and reality often blur, it’s hard to imagine a more cinematic conclusion than this—a multimillion-dollar legal battle that ends not with a climactic courtroom speech, but with silence, paperwork, and a single decisive judgment. For Justin Baldoni, the dream of vindication has ended. For Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds, the cloud of litigation has lifted. And for everyone watching, this final ruling stands as a reminder that no matter how high the stakes or how public the feud, in the end, the law—and the truth—have the final word.