Justin Baldoni Loses Legal War With Blake Lively, Lawsuits Dismissed

[BUtterfield 8 41,818]

https://www.tmz.com/2025/06/09/justin-baldoni-claims-dismissed-blake-lively-new-york-times-ryan-reynolds/?adid=social-tw

[Bronco 25,088]

I mean the Lively camp branding it a victory is a total load of PR nonsense. 

The dismissal is because the Judge has ruled the NYT reporting on her lawsuit can't be considered damaging as it closely followed the law suit. The only win, and its a hollow win because of the dismissal, is the judge ruling she can't be held liable for the NYT report as it was based on a civil suit and not anything else. 

It doesn't in any way take a side on the he said/she said drama. 

[NickiMinajStan 6,894]

Good thing I installed Infinity Nikki yesterday, in case my novela ends before even going to trial . A gworl will be dressed spectacularly until the next drama arrives  

[Rahrahbitchson 23,200]

Explain in pop terms

[nATAH 56,971]

6 minutes ago, Rahrahbitchson said:

Explain in pop terms

katy tanked

[salty like sodium 2,262]

1 hour ago, Bronco said:

I mean the Lively camp branding it a victory is a total load of PR nonsense. 

The dismissal is because the Judge has ruled the NYT reporting on her lawsuit can't be considered damaging as it closely followed the law suit. The only win, and its a hollow win because of the dismissal, is the judge ruling she can't be held liable for the NYT report as it was based on a civil suit and not anything else. 

It doesn't in any way take a side on the he said/she said drama. 

Yeah tbh looking back now it's a bit weird his legal team, who seem quite smart, wasted time filing this complaint since the judge's ruling makes sense. So I'm wondering if it was a PR stunt more than an actual desire to win a motion or something, because the judge is right, none of what they complained about is actual defamation, except perhaps the NYT article but Lively and co are not legally liable for any potential biases in the reporting.

This is a set-back on their end but it's totally unrelated to the main suit, which is Lively's complaint, so the "war" is far from over or lost.

[Lord Mayhem 3,428]

Taylor's impact not impact 

[Bronco 25,088]

1 hour ago, salty like sodium said:

Yeah tbh looking back now it's a bit weird his legal team, who seem quite smart, wasted time filing this complaint since the judge's ruling makes sense. So I'm wondering if it was a PR stunt more than an actual desire to win a motion or something, because the judge is right, none of what they complained about is actual defamation, except perhaps the NYT article but Lively and co are not legally liable for any potential biases in the reporting.

This is a set-back on their end but it's totally unrelated to the main suit, which is Lively's complaint, so the "war" is far from over or lost.

Honestly his team have seemed a bit too focused on media stunts than legal proceedings tbh. 

And they have 2 weeks to refile a suit on some aspects of the original suit that are only being struck out due to being on the same suit as whats thrown out. 

Does seem like an own goal to **** up this much. But was likely based on Depp being successful with going after the press and Amber.

[StrawberryBlond 15,564]

Blake's lawsuit still moving forward means that the judge is objectively on her side. I just don't know know how Justin's can get thrown out when Blake started it all, has no proof of her claims and Justin was just defending himself by counter-suing. Money talks, that's all I can say. If Justin's name was much bigger, it might have been a different outcome. No matter what happens, Blake will be lucky to ever get a job in Hollywood again. Her reputation is mud and the public will never forget this. 

[Bronco 25,088]

5 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Blake's lawsuit still moving forward means that the judge is objectively on her side. I just don't know know how Justin's can get thrown out when Blake started it all, has no proof of her claims and Justin was just defending himself by counter-suing. Money talks, that's all I can say. If Justin's name was much bigger, it might have been a different outcome. No matter what happens, Blake will be lucky to ever get a job in Hollywood again. Her reputation is mud and the public will never forget this. 

That's a totally false reading. 

Justin's counter claim was thrown on the grounds that you cannot sue a news outlet for reporting legal action. And that you cannot sue over the content of a lawsuit as legal proceedings are privileged. 

The judge has not in any way shape or form ruled on the actual issues of the case.

The judge has allowed Justin's team to refile aspects of their countersuit about contract shenanigans by Blake's side. 

And by allowing the og suit by Lively to go ahead, it allows Justin's team the chance to legally disprove it and claim resultant damages.

[salty like sodium 2,262]

2 hours ago, Bronco said:

Honestly his team have seemed a bit too focused on media stunts than legal proceedings tbh. 

And they have 2 weeks to refile a suit on some aspects of the original suit that are only being struck out due to being on the same suit as whats thrown out. 

Does seem like an own goal to **** up this much. But was likely based on Depp being successful with going after the press and Amber.

yeah I suppose you might be right

13 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Blake's lawsuit still moving forward means that the judge is objectively on her side. I just don't know know how Justin's can get thrown out when Blake started it all, has no proof of her claims and Justin was just defending himself by counter-suing. Money talks, that's all I can say. If Justin's name was much bigger, it might have been a different outcome. No matter what happens, Blake will be lucky to ever get a job in Hollywood again. Her reputation is mud and the public will never forget this. 

You're assuming it's the same judge ruling over this case and the other one, I'm not even sure they're being reviewed by the same jurisdiction, let alone the same judge? Justin's case got thrown out because he sued for defamation and the ruling says that since Blake aired her grievances in privileged legal documents, not a newspaper interview, she did not defame him. It's as simple as that and the judge isn't wrong. I still think Blake majorly embellished the truth but that doesn't mean this specific countersuit had grounds because their accusation of defamation was factually incorrect.

[salty like sodium 2,262]

7 minutes ago, Bronco said:

That's a totally false reading. 

Justin's counter claim was thrown on the grounds that you cannot sue a news outlet for reporting legal action. And that you cannot sue over the content of a lawsuit as legal proceedings are privileged. 

The judge has not in any way shape or form ruled on the actual issues of the case.

The judge has allowed Justin's team to refile aspects of their countersuit about contract shenanigans by Blake's side. 

And by allowing the og suit by Lively to go ahead, it allows Justin's team the chance to legally disprove it and claim resultant damages.

what he said!