Blake Lively, Justin Baldoni's 'It Ends with Us' legal battle: A timeline
The onscreen drama of "It Ends with Us" is nothing compared to the legal battle its co-stars, Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni, are at the center of in real life.
The castmates have been embroiled in a heated legal feud since December 2024, when Lively first filed a complaint against Baldoni with the California Civil Rights Department accusing him of sexual harassment on the set of the film, which he also directed.
Lively, represented by attorney Michael Gottlieb, and Baldoni, represented by attorney Bryan Freedman, have launched dueling lawsuits against each other in the weeks since, dominating headlines and drawing attention at every step.
The actors are due to appear in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York March 9, 2026, with Judge Lewis Liman overseeing the case.
Ahead of their court date, Lively followed in Baldoni's steps by filing an amended version of her original complaint, one that her lawyers said "provides significant additional evidence and corroboration of her original claims."
Keep reading to see a timeline of the events in the actors' legal back-and-forth.
Aug. 9, 2024: 'It Ends with Us' debuts in theaters, becomes a box-office success
"It Ends with Us," based on Colleen Hoover's bestselling novel of the same name, debuted in theaters on Aug. 9.
The film, which explores themes of domestic violence and emotional abuse, starred Lively, Baldoni, Jenny Slate, Brandon Sklenar, Hasan Minaj and more. Christy Hall wrote the screenplay and Baldoni directed.
According to the box-office data website The Numbers, "It Ends with Us" grossed nearly $350 million worldwide.
Dec. 20, 2024: Lively files initial complaint
Lively first filed a complaint with the California Civil Rights Department in late December, alleging "severe emotional distress" after she said Baldoni and key stakeholders in the film sexually harassed her and attempted, along with Baldoni's production company, to orchestrate a smear campaign against her.
The allegations in the California complaint were detailed in a New York Times article titled "'We Can Bury Anyone': Inside a Hollywood Smear Machine." Included in the report were details surrounding a January 2024 "all hands" meeting -- held "prior to resuming filming of 'It Ends With Us,'" according to the complaint -- that was held to address Lively's workplace concerns, adding that it was attended by key stakeholders in the film and Lively's husband, Ryan Reynolds. Lively said she laid out specific demands at that meeting to ensure a safe and professional working environment.
Lively claimed Baldoni and his production company Wayfarer Studios, which produced "It Ends With Us," then engaged in a "social manipulation" campaign to "destroy" Lively's reputation, according to the complaint.
Freedman, the attorney for Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios, denied the allegations, calling Lively's claims "completely false, outrageous and intentionally salacious with an intent to publicly hurt and rehash a narrative in the media."
Lively was criticized during the "It Ends with Us" tour for her conduct during press interviews and from some who felt she did not highlight the film's focus of domestic violence enough.
Dec. 31, 2024: Baldoni sues The New York Times
Baldoni filed a lawsuit against the New York Times for libel and false light invasion of privacy on Dec. 31 after it published the article about Lively's California complaint.
The lawsuit claimed the Times, which included the alleged text messages and email exchanges between Baldoni's publicists Jennifer Abel and Melissa Nathan, had relied on "cherry-picked" and altered communications, with details "stripped of necessary context and deliberately spliced" to "mislead."
Baldoni is seeking $250 million in damages in his suit against the Times and also listed nine other co-plaintiffs including Wayfarer Studios LLC and his publicists, Abel and Nathan.
Freedman claimed in a statement to "GMA" that the Times "cowered to the wants and whims of two powerful 'untouchable' Hollywood elites, disregarding journalistic practices and ethics once befitting of the revered publication by using doctored and manipulated texts and intentionally omitting texts which dispute their chosen PR narrative."
A Times spokesperson told "GMA" that the they "plan to vigorously defend against the lawsuit," adding, "The role of an independent news organization is to follow the facts where they lead. Our story was meticulously and responsibly reported. It was based on a review of thousands of pages of original documents, including the text messages and emails that we quote accurately and at length in the article."
Dec. 31, 2024: Lively formalizes details from California complaint into a lawsuit against Baldoni
On Dec. 31, Lively formalized her initial California Civil Rights Department complaint into a lawsuit filed in New York, which reiterated details she previously presented in her California complaint.
Attorneys for Lively said in a statement that the actress's "decision to speak out has resulted in further retaliation and attacks."
"As alleged in Ms. Lively's federal Complaint, Wayfarer and its associates have violated federal and California state law by retaliating against her for reporting sexual harassment and workplace safety concerns," Lively's attorneys claimed. "Now, the defendants will answer for their conduct in federal court."
Baldoni denied the allegations.
Jan. 7, 2025: Lively and Baldoni's lawyers issue dueling statements
In a statement obtained by ABC News on Jan. 7, Lively's lawyers said their client's "federal litigation before the Southern District of New York involves serious claims of sexual harassment and retaliation, backed by concrete facts."
"This is not a 'feud' arising from 'creative differences' or a 'he said/she said' situation," Lively's attorneys added. "As alleged in Ms. Lively's complaint, and as we will prove in litigation, Wayfarer and its associates engaged in unlawful, retaliatory astroturfing against Ms. Lively for simply trying to protect herself and others on a film set."
The statement continued by asking "everyone to remember that sexual harassment and retaliation are illegal in every workplace and in every industry."
Freedman, Baldoni's lawyer, responded to the statement from Lively's camp by saying, "It is painfully ironic that Blake Lively is accusing Justin Baldoni of weaponizing the media when her own team orchestrated this vicious attack by sending the New York Times grossly edited documents prior to even filing the complaint."
"We are releasing all of the evidence which will show a pattern of bullying and threats to take over the movie. None of this will come as a surprise because consistent with her past behavior Blake Lively used other people to communicate those threats and bully her way to get whatever she wanted. We have all the receipts and more."
Jan. 16, 2025: Baldoni sues Lively and Reynolds
Baldoni formally filed a civil lawsuit against Lively, Reynolds, the couple's publicist Leslie Sloane and Sloane's public relations company Vision PR for, among other things, extortion and defamation.
Baldoni accused Lively of having "robbed" him and Wayfarer Studios LLC of control of "It Ends with Us," as well as destroying Baldoni's "personal and professional reputations and livelihood."
Baldoni, Wayfarer, Baldoni's publicist Jennifer Abel, Melissa Nathan -- a crisis PR specialist hired by Wayfarer Studios -- and Baldoni's friend, podcast co-host, and Wayfarer CEO Jamey Heath are listed as plaintiffs. They are seeking $400 million in damages.
The suit claims Lively pushed a "false and damaging narrative" against Baldoni that was "rife with lies and doctored 'evidence'" in accusing him of sexual harassment on the set of "It Ends with Us."
Baldoni's suit accuses Sloane of having gone "so far as to propagate malicious stories portraying Baldoni as a sexual predator" and Reynolds of using the term to describe Baldoni in a call with Baldoni's agent. The suit claims Reynolds told Baldoni's rep to "drop" him as a client.
The suit also claims Baldoni and the other plaintiffs were "the targets of a calculated and vitriolic smear campaign" lodged by the defendants, and that Lively, leveraging her and her husband's star power, took control of the film -- including Lively having her own cut of it.
Freedman called the lawsuit "a legal action based on an overwhelming amount of untampered evidence detailing Blake Lively and her team's duplicitous attempt to destroy Justin Baldoni, his team and their respective companies by disseminating grossly edited, unsubstantiated, new and doctored information to the media."
Lively's lawyers responded with a statement calling the lawsuit "another chapter in the abuser playbook."
"This is an age-old story: A woman speaks up with concrete evidence of sexual harassment and retaliation and the abuser attempts to turn the tables on the victim. This is what experts call DARVO. Deny. Attack. Reverse Victim Offender."
"They are trying to shift the narrative to Ms. Lively by falsely claiming that she seized creative control and alienated the cast from Mr. Baldoni. The evidence will show that the cast and others had their own negative experiences with Mr. Baldoni and Wayfarer," the statement continued. "The evidence will also show that Sony asked Ms. Lively to oversee Sony's cut of the film, which they then selected for distribution and was a resounding success."
Jan. 27, 2025: Lively's attorneys send latest letter to judge regarding actions by Baldoni's lawyer
Lively and Reynolds' lawyers filed the latest of several letters to Judge Liman on Jan. 27 regarding Freedman's comments to the media.
The couple's legal team has claimed Freedman is influencing "public perception" of the cases and "tainting" and attempting to "prejudice" a jury pool "beyond repair" by sharing "false and defamatory statements and character attacks against Ms. Lively" to the media.
Their letter requested the judge to keep Freedman from releasing "strategically selected" evidence, specifically pointing to Freedman's promise to create a website to house all communications between Lively and Baldoni for public consumption. The website, they claim, would be "incomplete, biased, and prejudicial by design." They also asked the judge to address Freedman's conduct with the media, writing, "The endless stream of defamatory and extrajudicial media statements must end."
In response, Freedman said in a statement: "The irony continues to be rich for team Lively/Reynolds. Our intention with the upcoming website is to do the exact opposite of what they themselves did when they gave provably false information to the New York Times. We will not be selective, we will not cherry pick and we will not doctor text messages. Both Ms. Lively and Mr. Reynolds do not yet understand that there isn't one rule for them and one rule for everybody else."
Jan. 27, 2025: Judge sets trial date, initial pretrial conference
On Jan. 27, Judge Liman set a trial date in the matter of Lively and Baldoni's lawsuits for March 9, 2026.
At the time, he signaled a plan to consolidate the actors' lawsuits against each other into one and told both parties to be prepared to address "pretrial publicity and attorney conduct" at the initial pretrial conference on Feb. 3.
Jan. 30, 2025: Judge officially consolidates Lively and Baldoni's lawsuits
Lively and Reynolds' attorney stated they intend to file a motion to "dismiss" Baldoni's lawsuit against them in a court document submitted Jan. 30.
In an order also filed Jan. 30, Judge Liman instructed the clerk to consolidate the cases between Lively and Baldoni into one singular case.
Jan. 31, 2025: Baldoni's team launches website containing amended complaint, timeline
In the days before the actors' lawyers met in court for the first time, Baldoni's attorneys launched a website containing two links: one to an amended version of Baldoni's complaint, as well as a document titled "Timeline of Relevant Events," both of which are noted to have been published Jan. 31.
Feb. 3, 2025: Lively and Baldoni's lawyers meet in court for the 1st time
Attorneys for Lively and Baldoni met in court for the first time on Feb. 3 for a 90-minute hearing that largely revolved around scheduling going forward but offered insights into upcoming strategy, what's to come and concerns about the case being litigated in the media.
Gottlieb said they would be moving to dismiss the complaint from Baldoni and that they would file an amended complaint of their own by the end of next week that would add both new claims and new defendants -- though they did not say who or what.
Freedman, an attorney for Baldoni, said they plan to dismiss their case against The New York Times in California, as the publication has been added to the New York case in an effort to speed things along, saying "it kind of made no sense at all to be doing this on different coasts."
The New York Times told ABC News in a statement Monday -- which referenced their initial statement -- that their story "was meticulously and responsibly reported" and that they "plan to vigorously defend against the lawsuit."
Despite the changes, Freedman indicated their desire to move the case along and noted he wants to take Lively's deposition as soon as possible, saying, "We would like to move this case along as quickly as possible. There's no reason to wait."
Lively's attorney said the actress has "suffered an ongoing campaign of retaliation" and is "very eager to have her day in court."
Judge Liman said the idea of early depositions is "not going forward" until all parties are decided on in the case, adding, "I'm not going to have people deposed twice, unless there's a really good reason."
Sigrid McCawley, an attorney for Sloane and Vision PR, Lively and Reynolds' publicist, said they would be filing a motion to dismiss regarding the claims against her client and her business.
The issue of the case being litigated in the press was a major topic of discussion by both lawyers.
Gottlieb said Freedman's public statements have been defamatory and "continue the campaign of retaliation" against Lively. He added that they are not seeking "a gag order" against Freedman, only for the judge to adopt the rules of professional conduct for lawyers that govern what can be said outside of court.
Freedman signaled he also wanted those rules adopted, saying, "This has not been a one-way street."
Both the judge and Lively's attorney took issue with an attachment Freedman included on a recently launched website, the document titled "Timeline of Relevant Events."
"The law is pretty clear -- you can't just attach a factual narrative," Judge Liman said, later stating that sanctions are possible.
At one point in Monday's hearing, the judge also stated that he has the power to move up the trial date if the case is litigated in the press to the point that it becomes untenable. "I don't want to do that," Judge Liman warned, but noted that he could.
Feb. 16, 2025: Lively and Reynolds attend 'SNL50: The Anniversary Special'
Lively and Reynolds attended the 50th anniversary special for "Saturday Night Live" in New York City on Feb. 16. During the show, the couple participated in a segment with comedians Tina Fey and Amy Poehler titled "Audience Q&A" in a moment that seemingly referenced their ongoing legal drama.
As Reynolds stood up to ask a question, Fey asked, "How's it going?"
Reynolds answered, "Great. Why? What have you heard?"
Fey then said "cool stuff only" while Poehler said "great stuff."
Reynolds, in response, said, "Yeah, OK," while Lively smiled.
Feb. 18, 2025: Lively files amended complaint
Lively filed an amended version of her lawsuit in court on Feb. 18.
The actress's lawyers said in a statement that the new version "provides significant additional evidence and corroboration of her original claims" and "includes previously undisclosed communications" as well as "numerous other witnesses."
The amended complaint alleges that Lively was not the only woman to voice concern over sexual harassment on the set of "It Ends with Us."
Lively's complaint notes that in May 2023 "another female cast member reported her own concerns regarding Mr. Baldoni's unwelcome behavior" and that the cast member came forward despite "considerable reservations" because she felt "the work on the Film was suffering as a result of Mr. Baldoni's behavior." She claims Baldoni then "responded to that cast member in writing, acknowledging that he was aware of her concerns and that adjustments would be made" but that conditions didn't approve.
"Later, another female cast member confided to Ms. Lively that she too felt uncomfortable on set," the amended complaint reads. "All of this occurred, and was documented in writing, almost one year before the editing of the Film began."
Lively's amended complaint alleges that Baldoni's "false narrative crumbles under the indisputable truth that Ms. Lively was not alone in complaining about Mr. Baldoni and raised her concerns contemporaneously as they arose in 2023, not in connection with some imagined power play for control of the Film in 2024." Additionally, it alleges Baldoni "acknowledged the complaints in writing at the time" and "knew that women other than Ms. Lively also were uncomfortable and had complained about his behavior."
Lively argues in her amended complaint that Baldoni's public persona of having "portrayed himself as a leader of the male feminist movement" is a "stark contrast" to his private behavior, which she alleges "is replete with hypocrisy, misogyny, and retaliation."
The actress' attorneys said in a statement of the amended complaint, "Over the next several weeks, we will move to dismiss the utterly meritless lawsuits brought against Ms. Lively and Mr. Reynolds, and we will move full speed ahead with discovery that we expect will reveal shocking details about the depth to which the Defendants have sunk in their unending efforts to 'bury,' 'ruin,' and 'destroy' Ms. Lively and her family."
The amended complaint has also added a new claim for defamation, which, according to Lively's attorneys, is "based on the repeated false statements the defendants have made about Ms. Lively since she filed her original complaint."
Baldoni's lawyer, Freedman, issued a statement in response to Lively's amended complaint, claiming in part that it "is filled with unsubstantial hearsay of unnamed persons who are clearly no longer willing to come forward or publicly support her claims."
"Since documents do not lie and people do, the upcoming depositions of those who initially supported Ms. Lively's false claims and those who are witnesses to her own behavior will be enlightening," he continued. "What is truly remarkable here is Ms. Lively's lack of actual evidence."
