Judge Dismisses Justin Baldoni’s $400 Million Countersuit Against Blake Lively, Ryan Reynolds, and The New York Times

In a significant legal blow to actor-director Justin Baldoni, a judge has dismissed his $400 million countersuit against actress Blake Lively, actor Ryan Reynolds, their publicist Leslie Sloane, and The New York Times. The suit, which accused Lively and Reynolds of extortion and defamation, along with a separate $250 million defamation lawsuit against the Times, was thrown out on June 9, 2025, by Judge Lewis J. Liman.

The decision comes as a major setback for Baldoni, who had filed the extensive legal claims in response to Lively’s lawsuit filed in December 2024. Lively had accused Baldoni of sexual harassment and retaliation, allegations which Baldoni has denied. In his countersuit, Baldoni argued that the statements made by Lively, Reynolds, and Sloane were defamatory and aimed at damaging his reputation.

However, Judge Liman ruled that the Wayfarer Parties—Baldoni and his associated entities—failed to provide sufficient evidence to support their defamation claims. According to the court’s ruling, the Wayfarer Parties could not show that the defendants—Lively, Reynolds, Sloane, and The New York Times—had serious doubts about the truth of their statements, a crucial factor for defamation under the law.

“The Wayfarer Parties have not alleged that Lively is responsible for any statements other than the statements in her CRD complaint, which are privileged,” Judge Liman wrote in the opinion. “The Wayfarer Parties have alleged that Reynolds and Sloane made additional statements accusing Baldoni of sexual misconduct and that the Times made additional statements accusing the Wayfarer Parties of engaging in a smear campaign. But the Wayfarer Parties have not alleged that Reynolds, Sloane or the Times would have seriously doubted these statements were true based on the information available to them.”

As a result, the judge dismissed the entire amended complaint, though Baldoni’s legal team may still amend their claims concerning breach of implied covenant and tortious interference with contract before the June 23 deadline.

Following the decision, lawyers for Lively and her publicist expressed strong satisfaction. Esra Hudson and Mike Gottlieb, representing Lively, called the ruling “a total victory and a complete vindication” for their client, Reynolds, Sloane, and the Times. They referred to Baldoni’s countersuit as “a sham” and criticized it as a retaliatory legal move. They also indicated that they would be pursuing attorneys’ fees, treble damages, and punitive damages in future legal action against the Wayfarer parties for what they described as “abusive litigation.”

Sigrid McCawley, representing Leslie Sloane, echoed similar sentiments. “Leslie Sloane has consistently said that she never defamed Baldoni or the Wayfarer Parties and she was wrongfully dragged into this lawsuit,” McCawley stated, adding that Sloane was “fully vindicated” by the ruling.

The New York Times also issued a statement, expressing appreciation for the court’s recognition that the lawsuit was an attempt to stifle legitimate journalism. “We are grateful to the court for seeing the lawsuit for what it was: a meritless attempt to stifle honest reporting,” the Times spokesperson said. “Our journalists went out and covered carefully and fairly a story of public importance.”

The ongoing legal saga between Baldoni and Lively is far from over. While the countersuit has been dismissed, the pair’s trial, which will see both actors testify, is set for March 2026. Meanwhile, Lively recently agreed to drop two claims against Baldoni—intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress—as part of streamlining her case.

This development in the ongoing legal drama marks a pivotal moment in what promises to be a high-profile court battle. With both parties gearing up for future proceedings, the outcome of the March trial remains uncertain, but for now, Lively, Reynolds, Sloane, and the Times have emerged victorious in this latest legal skirmish.