Recent legal documents show a letter written by Blake Lively is now being used against her in her dispute with Justin Baldoni, her co-star and the director of their 2024 film, It Ends With Us. The letter reportedly details the extent of Lively’s influence during filming.
The 38-year-old actress requested a producing credit for a film and sent the Producers Guild of America a detailed, five-page letter explaining why she deserved it. She claimed to have been involved in every aspect of the film’s creation and listed 77 specific contributions, many of which began with the phrase ‘I did…’.
In a major setback for her $161 million case, Judge Lewis Liman ruled on Thursday that Blake Lively had so much creative control over the film that she legally couldn’t be considered an employee. This key decision meant the laws Lively was using to support her claims didn’t apply, leading the judge to dismiss 10 out of her 13 arguments.
As a lifestyle expert, I’ve been following the buzz around Blake Lively’s recent acknowledgment of an incredible film honor. In a letter from June, she called it the ultimate recognition in the movie world, and she sweetly mentioned her friend Bradley Cooper. She also really emphasized just how much dedication and effort she poured into the project – it’s clear she’s incredibly proud of the work she did!
As a lifestyle expert, I often see people wanting to have a say in projects they’re involved with, and this case is a great example. The judge pointed out that she didn’t just have the right to control her role in the film through her contract, she actually used that right – she really took charge and made her voice heard!
Because she was considered an independent contractor and not a staff member, she couldn’t pursue her legal claims under federal and California state laws, which only cover employees.
The judge’s decision was a major setback for Lively, throwing out 10 of the 13 claims she made against Baldoni and the filmmakers.
The trial scheduled for May 18th will now focus on only three charges: retaliation, helping someone commit retaliation, and violating a specific part of the contract called the Contract Rider.
Attorneys for both sides will meet on Monday afternoon to discuss where they each stand on the issue.
If the case goes to trial, the main focus will likely be on the claims that Baldoni’s team tried to damage reputations online when the movie came out.
Judge Liman based his decision on contract and labor laws in New York and California. Lively argued these laws supported her claim of $161 million in damages, stemming from alleged sexual harassment and subsequent retaliation.
As a lifestyle expert, I’ve been following the Lively case closely, and the central question really came down to her working status – was she a freelancer or a traditional employee? Judge Liman ultimately ruled that she was, in fact, an independent contractor.
He determined that she had an unusual level of authority and influence, exceeding what was typical for an employee.
Lively seemed to want a PGA credit to support her goal of working behind the camera, and having that recognition – often called a ‘tag’ – would have been very important for her to achieve it.
Having a PGA credit boosts an actor’s reputation and often makes them eligible for awards consideration for the films they appear in.
Scarlett Johansson received a credit as both an actor and producer on her 2024 movie, Fly Me To The Moon.
Judge Liman based his decision on 22 arguments made by Lively in her letter to the PGA. These included her claim that she was instrumental in moving the filming location from Boston to New York, and that she personally reviewed hundreds of audition tapes to find the actress who portrayed a younger version of her character, Lily Bloom.
Oh my god, you will NOT believe how involved she was! It wasn’t just acting, she was practically running the whole show! She was constantly on Zoom with everyone, making sure everything was perfect. And she didn’t hesitate to make tough calls – she actually fired someone important on set! Between takes, she wasn’t even relaxing, she was glued to the monitors, overseeing everything. She even had her own editors working with her, and she hand-picked almost all the music! Seriously, 90 percent! And then she just took over the marketing too! It’s like…she didn’t just star in the film, she built it. I’m obsessed!
Lively told the PGA that her work outside of being on camera is the most meaningful thing she’s accomplished in her two decades in the industry.
She also pointed out that the PGA rarely considers applications like hers, as they usually decide on awarding credit through their own internal review process.
Lively shared that making the film was an all-consuming experience, challenging her in every way – from the practical details and creative process to her emotional well-being.
Thank you for your consideration. I understand this isn’t the typical way these grants are awarded, and I appreciate that.
In his ruling, Judge Liman said that Lively’s ‘role far exceeded that of a traditional employee’.
He explained that she had the financial freedom to leave whenever she wanted, with the only risk being a possible violation of her contract.
She confidently negotiated her return to work, setting her own conditions. Plus, she secured a share of the film’s profits, meaning she’d be paid not only for her services, but also based on how well the movie did.
According to the judge, the ‘undisputed facts’ showed that Lively was not a member of staff.
He argued that while each piece of evidence might not be completely convincing on its own, considering all the evidence together leaves no doubt.
The judge also found that Lively’s attempts to gain more control created another problem: she hadn’t signed the Actor Loanout Agreement, a document that would have established guidelines for handling sexual harassment during filming.
In May 2023, Baldoni’s legal team shared a copy of the agreement with Lively’s team, but it wasn’t finalized with signatures before filming began a few weeks later.
The agreement wasn’t finalized by the time filming ended in February 2024. According to the judge, Lively’s lawyers returned it with requested changes to about 20% of the document.
Baldoni’s lawyers completely dismissed proposed changes to the policies on sexual harassment and confidentiality.
By June 2024, a frustrated Baldoni, age 42, texted that Lively wasn’t going to sign the contract – and she didn’t.
Even so, Lively attempted to use the ALA agreement in a legal claim, but the judge dismissed it because she hadn’t signed the document, making it invalid.
Judge Liman, whose brother Doug is a film director known for movies like The Bourne Identity, Swingers, and Mr. & Mrs. Smith, stated that Lively doesn’t adequately address the main issue in her argument.
She argues the agreement became official for both Baldoni and the producers during the negotiation process, but she can’t specify exactly when that happened or which version of the agreement they agreed to.
‘Unless both parties are bound, neither party is bound.
Do we know which copy of the ALA-bound Lively we have? Specifically, is it the one that doesn’t include the section about sexual harassment?
Despite the judge’s ruling, Lively’s lawyer, Sigrid McCawley, stated they still plan to proceed to trial.
She explained the case centered on the harsh way the defendants responded and the extreme measures they took to damage Blake Lively’s reputation, all because she advocated for on-set safety.
According to McCawley, Blake Lively believes the most important outcome is that those responsible for the online attacks have been identified and are now facing consequences from other women they’ve targeted.
Alexandra Shapiro and Jonathan Bach, lawyers for Baldoni, stated they were happy that the sexual harassment allegations had been dropped.
The group acknowledged the seriousness of the claims and expressed their appreciation for the court’s thorough examination of the evidence and legal arguments.
Now that the case has been considerably simplified, we are eager to present our side and address the remaining issues in court.
The outcome of the case remains uncertain. According to a court order released Friday, Lively’s attorneys must call US Magistrate Judge Sarah Cave on Monday at 3pm to discuss their latest settlement offer.
Lawyers for Baldoni and his company Wayfarer Productions have been told to call one hour later.
Despite this setback, the legal battle isn’t finished. Michael Gottlieb, another lawyer representing the actress, stated she remains optimistic and prepared for trial.
Gottlieb stated that the jury will still be presented with her allegations of sexual harassment, which he described as the central issue of the case.
Gottlieb explained that the court’s decision to dismiss Ms. Lively’s harassment case wasn’t a statement about whether the defendants’ actions were right or wrong, but rather a ruling based on legal technicalities.
The court decided Ms. Lively couldn’t bring her sexual harassment case to a jury. This was because she didn’t have an employment contract, she worked as an independent contractor rather than a direct employee, and the harassment happened in New Jersey, not California.
Read More
- ‘Project Hail Mary’s Unexpected Post-Credits Scene Is Worth Sticking Around
- Total Football free codes and how to redeem them (March 2026)
- Limbus Company 2026 Roadmap Revealed
- The Division Resurgence Specializations Guide: Best Specialization for Beginners
- After THAT A Woman of Substance cliffhanger, here’s what will happen in a second season
- Brawl Stars Sands of Time Brawl Pass brings Sandstalker Lily and Sultan Cordelius sets, along with chromas and more
- Brawl Stars Brawl Cup Pro Pass arrives with the Dragon Crow skin and Chroma, unique cosmetics, and more rewards
- Clash of Clans April 2026 Gold Pass Season introduces a Archer Queen skin
- XO, Kitty season 3 soundtrack: The songs you may recognise from the Netflix show
- Gold Rate Forecast
2026-04-04 02:20