Crashes, No Sound, or Screen Glitches?
Random freezes, missing sound and display glitches usually trace back to one bad driver. Find and replace yours safely.Free scan · under a minutePC Slower Than It Used to Be?
A free scan shows the junk files, broken settings and background clutter dragging Windows down - then fixes them in one click.Free scan · Windows 10 & 11Short answer: The Blake Lively–Justin Baldoni dispute began as a conflict over the production and promotion of It Ends with Us, then became a public-relations fight and competing federal lawsuits. Lively alleged sexual harassment and retaliation; Baldoni denied those allegations and said Lively, Ryan Reynolds and others tried to take creative control of the film before portraying him as abusive or unprofessional. Most of Lively’s claims were dismissed on April 2, 2026, while some retaliation theories survived. The parties settled on May 4, 2026, before trial, and the terms were not disclosed.
Content note: This article discusses alleged sexual harassment, workplace retaliation and the film’s domestic-violence themes. The allegations remain disputed. There was no trial verdict establishing either side’s complete account.
What the Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni dispute is actually about
The story is more complicated than a simple celebrity feud. Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni worked together on the 2024 film adaptation of Colleen Hoover’s It Ends with Us. Lively played Lily Bloom, while Baldoni played Ryle Kincaid and directed the film. Their working relationship later produced two sharply conflicting narratives.
Lively said Baldoni and people associated with his production company engaged in inappropriate workplace conduct, including alleged boundary violations, comments and improvised sexual content that she considered unacceptable. She also alleged that, after she raised concerns, defendants organized or participated in a public-relations and digital campaign designed to damage her reputation.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →#1 Best Overall
- 80's Favorite Movies - Back To The Future - Movie Poster (Regular Style) - Unframed
- Regular Style
- Release Year: 1985
- LARGE 24" x 36" WALL SIZE UNFRAMED POSTER: Eye-catching design fills your wall with inspiration and color. Perfect for creating a bold visual centerpiece on any wall
- VIBRANT, HIGH-RESOLUTION PRINT: Printed on high-quality paper with bold colors and sharp detail that pop in any lighting - creating a professional, premium look.
Baldoni denied that his conduct amounted to sexual harassment. His side described the conflict as a creative and promotional dispute, alleging that Lively and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, sought greater control over the film and then used accusations of misconduct to discredit him when the disagreement escalated.
Those accounts are not interchangeable, and neither should be presented as a proven summary of events. The court ruled on whether particular legal claims could proceed; it did not issue a complete factual verdict about every disputed conversation or on-set interaction.
The film and the source material
It Ends with Us follows Lily Bloom as she enters a relationship with Ryle Kincaid and confronts behavior that recalls domestic violence in Lily’s family history. The film also stars Brandon Sklenar and Jenny Slate. That subject matter is important context for understanding why discussions of the production became especially sensitive, but the plot and themes of the movie do not prove what happened behind the scenes.
Sony lists the film as available through digital platforms as well as on physical media. Viewers who want to revisit the adaptation can look for the Blu-ray/DVD edition; watching the film, however, cannot verify or disprove either party’s allegations about the production.
Timeline: how the dispute became a legal case
| Date | What happened | Why it mattered |
|---|---|---|
| 2024 | It Ends with Us was released as a film adaptation of Hoover’s novel. | Lively and Baldoni’s professional relationship became the subject of later competing allegations. |
| December 20, 2024 | Lively filed a complaint with the California Civil Rights Department. | She alleged sexual harassment, a hostile work environment and retaliation. |
| December 31, 2024 | Lively filed a federal lawsuit in the Southern District of New York. | Her retaliation theory included an alleged coordinated public-relations and digital campaign intended to turn public opinion against her. |
| January 2025 | Baldoni and Wayfarer-related parties filed a separate lawsuit seeking approximately $400 million. | They alleged defamation and related wrongdoing by Lively, Reynolds, Lively’s publicist Leslie Sloane and others. |
| June 2025 | The court dismissed Baldoni’s amended lawsuit. His defamation claims against The New York Times were also dismissed. | The claims could not proceed under the applicable legal standards. The dismissals were not a factual finding that every allegation made by Lively was true. |
| April 2, 2026 | Judge Lewis J. Liman issued a major ruling on Lively’s case. | Most claims were dismissed, including the sexual-harassment claims as pleaded, but certain retaliation claims remained capable of proceeding. |
| May 4, 2026 | The parties announced a settlement, roughly two weeks before jury selection was scheduled to begin on May 18. | There was no trial verdict. The financial and other settlement terms were not disclosed. |
| June 12, 2026 | The court granted Lively’s motion for attorneys’ fees and costs under California Civil Code §47.1, while denying her request for treble and punitive damages. | The order concerned fee entitlement related to defending against the Wayfarer parties’ defamation claims. It did not award damages for the entire dispute or set the final amount of fees and costs. |
What Blake Lively alleged
Lively’s complaint described alleged boundary violations, inappropriate comments, improvised sexual content and disagreements over intimacy and workplace conditions during the making of the film. She said she raised concerns and that the response included retaliation.
Her retaliation allegations went beyond ordinary negative publicity. She claimed that defendants, including Baldoni and people connected with Wayfarer Studios and public-relations operations, coordinated a campaign intended to undermine her credibility and reputation. The litigation involved or named Wayfarer Studios, It Ends With Us Movie LLC, Jamey Heath, Steve Sarowitz, Melissa Nathan, Jennifer Abel and public-relations entities, among others.
These statements describe the allegations in her legal filings, not findings that a court made after hearing a full trial.
Rank #2
- You Get - There are 64PCS different movie poster sticker packs. All Cute stickers decals are in the range of 2-3 inches size. They are all made of PVC vinyl waterproof stickers, high-definition patterns and bright colors.
- Widely Used - Use these cute stickers or cool stickers to decorate your items. Such as water bottles scrapbook journal guitar skateboard keyboard travel case car bumper bike bicycle motorcycle phone case computer macbook laptop stickers.
- Gift Reward - Eikecy has many style stickers, kawaii cute funny cartoon vintage vsco graffiti cool aesthetic stickers. Suitable for all ages, stickers for adults kids teens boys girls women family.
- High Quality - The small stickers bulk has the function of sun protection and waterproof, is safe and non-toxic, and is not easy to tear. If it's not needed, they are easily removable/reusable and not leave sticky residue.
- How to Use - Get your stickers, clean the surface, sticker on, then use your imagination create works NOW!
What Justin Baldoni alleged in response
Baldoni denied Lively’s accusations. His countersuit argued that Lively and Reynolds attempted to gain control over the film and that the allegations of sexual misconduct were then used to portray him as abusive or unprofessional and damage his career.
His lawsuit, filed with Wayfarer-related parties, sought about $400 million and asserted defamation and related claims against Lively, Reynolds, Sloane and others. Baldoni also pursued claims connected to The New York Times after the newspaper published reporting about the dispute.
The court dismissed Baldoni’s amended lawsuit in June 2025 and dismissed his defamation claims against the newspaper. A dismissal means the pleaded claims could not continue under the governing legal rules; it is not, by itself, a judicial finding that every factual assertion by the opposing side was correct.
What the April 2, 2026 court ruling decided
The April ruling substantially narrowed Lively’s case. Judge Liman granted judgment on several claims, including her claims under Title VII and California Labor Code §1102.5. The ruling treated Lively as an independent contractor rather than an employee for those statutory theories, which defeated those parts of the case.
The court also dismissed the sexual-harassment claims as pleaded. That meant those claims were no longer going to a jury in their original form. It did not amount to a blanket factual endorsement of Baldoni’s account or a finding that no disputed conduct occurred.
At the same time, the court found genuine disputes of material fact on certain retaliation claims under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. Those claims against It Ends With Us Movie LLC and Wayfarer were capable of proceeding. The court granted summary judgment to some individual defendants on aiding-and-abetting theories, further narrowing who could face a trial.
Rank #3
- OFFICIALLY LICENSED BY IMDb - Based on millions of IMDb user ratings and the only top 100 movies scratch off poster licensed by IMDb - The most official and complete movie list of all time!
- WORK OF ART - Friends and family will appreciate the professional illustration and detail that went into all 100 original "mini movie poster" designs. Perfect gift for movie lovers!
- SUPERIOR QUALITY - With the high level of satisfied custumers, you can trust us to provide the best possible print quality and scratch-off experience. A great addition to your movie room accessories!
- INVESTING IN LOCAL QUALITY: We designed this poster in Madison, WI and printed it down the highway Vernon Hills, Illinois with one of the best scratch-off printers in the USA.
- STANDARD A2 POSTER SIZE - (16.5"x23.4") - Fits standard frame sizes. Frame the poster once all the movies are scratched-off and add it to your home movie theater room decor.
The distinction is central to understanding the case. A court can conclude that a particular claim fails because of the plaintiff’s legal status, the elements of a statute or the available evidence without deciding every factual question raised by the parties. In this case, the April order left a narrower retaliation case alive even after the sexual-harassment claims were dismissed.
Why the parties settled before trial
Lively and Baldoni announced their settlement on May 4, 2026, shortly before the scheduled May 18 trial. Their joint statement expressed pride in the film, acknowledged that Lively’s concerns deserved to be heard and said the parties hoped the agreement would bring closure and allow them to move forward peacefully. It also referred to raising awareness for domestic-violence survivors as a shared goal.
Recommended Free Tools
The settlement’s financial and other terms were not made public. That makes it impossible to reliably infer whether either party admitted wrongdoing, paid a particular amount, or accepted the other side’s complete version of events. Settlements can reflect litigation risk, cost, privacy, reputational concerns and negotiated business interests.
The most accurate description is therefore that the parties settled before trial. It is not accurate to say that Lively won a jury verdict, that Baldoni was cleared by a jury, or that the settlement conclusively proved a coordinated smear campaign or a fabricated harassment claim.
What the June 12 fee order means
The later fee order is significant but narrower than some headlines may suggest. On June 12, 2026, the court granted Lively’s request for attorneys’ fees and costs under California Civil Code §47.1. It denied her request for treble and punitive damages and expressly left the final amount of fees and costs to be determined later.
The order related to Lively’s defense against the Wayfarer parties’ defamation claims. It was not a damages verdict, a finding that Baldoni committed sexual harassment, or a ruling resolving every issue arising from the making and promotion of It Ends with Us.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems2Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute3Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsRank #4
- High quality poster printing, quality guaranteed!
- Whether you are a collector or just generous with gifts
- Great wall decor or perfect gift idea!
- Perfect for your home, office, or a gift
- Brand New Item.Great Collectible.
Where Ryan Reynolds and Taylor Swift fit in
Ryan Reynolds
Reynolds became part of the litigation because Baldoni’s countersuit named him. Baldoni’s allegations attributed a role to Reynolds in the alleged effort to obtain creative control and damage Baldoni’s reputation. Lively’s case and the broader public discussion also connected the dispute to the couple’s professional and personal relationship.
His inclusion in Baldoni’s lawsuit does not mean that a court found the allegations against him true. As with the other claims, the relevant lawsuits and defenses must be separated from proven facts.
Taylor Swift
Taylor Swift was drawn into public discussion because messages and references involving Lively and Swift appeared in discovery and subsequent media coverage. She was not a principal party to the settled Lively–Baldoni case.
Social-media speculation and celebrity-friendship reporting should not be treated as established evidence of Swift’s involvement in the underlying production dispute. The central civil litigation was between Lively and the Baldoni/Wayfarer side.
What is known, and what remains unproven
| Established by the public record described here | Not established by a public trial verdict |
|---|---|
| Lively filed a California Civil Rights Department complaint and then a federal lawsuit. | The complete truth of the disputed on-set interactions. |
| Baldoni and Wayfarer-related parties filed a separate lawsuit seeking about $400 million. | The full scope and intent of any alleged digital or public-relations campaign. |
| Most of Lively’s claims were dismissed in the April 2, 2026 ruling, while certain retaliation claims survived. | That either side’s entire narrative was correct. |
| Baldoni’s amended lawsuit and his claims against The New York Times were dismissed in 2025. | That Baldoni was factually cleared of every allegation or that Lively proved every allegation. |
| The parties settled on May 4, 2026, with undisclosed terms. | Whether the settlement included an admission, payment or other concession by either side. |
| Lively received an order recognizing entitlement to attorneys’ fees and costs, while treble and punitive damages were denied. | The final amount of fees and costs, which the order left for later determination. |
How to describe the story accurately
- Accurate: Lively alleged sexual harassment and retaliation, and Baldoni denied the allegations while asserting a competing creative-control and defamation theory.
- Accurate: The April 2026 ruling dismissed most of Lively’s claims and left certain retaliation claims alive.
- Accurate: The parties settled before the scheduled trial, and the settlement terms were not disclosed.
- Misleading: Saying that Lively won the entire case or that Baldoni was cleared.
- Misleading: Calling the April ruling proof that the alleged harassment did or did not happen.
- Misleading: Calling the June fee order a damages award or a verdict on the production dispute.
- Misleading: Treating Swift as a principal litigant because her name appeared in public discussion about discovery.
Current status as of August 11, 2026
The central Lively–Baldoni civil dispute has settled. No jury decided the competing accounts, and the settlement terms remain undisclosed. The latest material court development identified here is the June 12 fee order granting Lively entitlement to attorneys’ fees and costs while denying treble and punitive damages; the final amount had not been determined in that order.
The unresolved public questions are therefore factual and interpretive: what happened during the production, how any communications campaign was organized and intended, and what considerations led both sides to settle. The court record establishes the sequence of filings, rulings and settlement, but it does not provide a complete public verdict on the relationship between the two leading figures.
Best Value
- Grading Scale: Mint, Near Mint, Very Good, Fair & Poor
- Original Movie Poster - Not a Reprint
- Posters come rolled in a plastic sleeve and shipped in a sturdy cardboard tube
- Posters are from Movie Studios and sizes are approximate.
- Poster is in Mint Condition
Source note: The film and home-video details come from Sony’s official film listing, while the novel details come from the official Simon & Schuster/Atria listing. The litigation summary follows the pleadings, court rulings and the parties’ May 4, 2026 joint settlement statement.
Frequently Asked Questions
Did Blake Lively win her lawsuit against Justin Baldoni?
There was no trial verdict. The April 2, 2026 ruling dismissed most of Lively’s claims, including the sexual-harassment claims as pleaded, but left certain retaliation claims capable of proceeding. The parties then settled on May 4, before trial, with undisclosed terms. A later order granted her entitlement to attorneys’ fees and costs in connection with defending against Wayfarer-related defamation claims, but that was not a verdict awarding damages for the entire dispute.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Was Justin Baldoni cleared of Blake Lively’s allegations?
No jury cleared Baldoni, and the settlement did not establish his complete account. The court dismissed particular claims under applicable legal and evidentiary standards, but that is different from a factual finding that every allegation was false or that no disputed conduct occurred.
Why did Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni not go to trial?
They announced a settlement on May 4, 2026, about two weeks before jury selection was scheduled to begin. The settlement’s financial and other terms were not disclosed, so the public cannot reliably infer an admission, payment or complete victory for either side.
What happened to Ryan Reynolds in the dispute?
Baldoni’s separate lawsuit named Reynolds and alleged that he helped Lively seek creative control of the film and damage Baldoni’s reputation. Those were Baldoni’s allegations, not findings that the court established as fact.
Was Taylor Swift a defendant in the case?
No. Swift became part of public discussion because messages and references involving her and Lively appeared in discovery and media coverage, but she was not a principal party to the settled Lively–Baldoni case.
What was the June 2026 attorneys’ fee ruling?
On June 12, 2026, the court granted Lively’s motion for attorneys’ fees and costs under California Civil Code §47.1 and denied treble and punitive damages. The ruling concerned fee entitlement related to defending against the Wayfarer parties’ defamation claims; it did not determine the final amount or constitute a damages verdict on the underlying harassment dispute.
The Bottom Line
Bottom line: Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni gave opposing accounts of a production conflict that became a legal and public-relations battle. The court dismissed most claims but left some retaliation theories alive, and the parties settled before a jury could decide the facts. As of August 11, 2026, the terms remain private, so the responsible conclusion is neither that Lively won everything nor that Baldoni was fully cleared.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
