Justin Baldoni has secured a major win over Blake Lively as a judge has dismissed all of the actress’ sexual harassment claims against him ahead of their trial.
The It Ends With us co-stars have been locked in legal drama since December 2024 – but Judge Lewis Liman’s decision today means the actress, 39, has only three claims left to argue.
The trial is still scheduled to proceed May 18 in New York City – but now Lively’s case is dramatically thinner.
Daily Mail has reached out to representatives for both Baldoni and Lively for comment.
In his ruling, Judge Lewis Liman said that legal contracts that Lively cited for her claim were ‘unenforceable’ because she didn’t sign them.
In particular, Lively did not sign the Actor Loanout Agreement, or ALA, which would have governed sexual harassment on set, after squabbling with Baldoni’s team for months about the terms.
Justin Baldoni has secured a major win over Blake Lively as a judge has dismissed all of the actress’ sexual harassment claims against him ahead of their trial.
A somber looking Lively is seen arriving at court on Februay 11 2026
Join the discussion
Did Lively just lose her strongest argument?
In his 152-page ruling, the judge wrote: ‘It is clear that the ALA is not and has never been a validly formed and binding contract, as IEWUM (It Ends With Us Movie) unambiguously expressed an intent not to be bound absent a fully executed and signed agreement’.
The judge disagreed with Lively for claiming she could sue because there was ‘no evidence the parties disagreed over the rest of the provision’ regarding sexual harassment.
‘That slices matters too finely,’ Judge Liman said.
‘The question whether Lively would have the unilateral right to halt production of the film if in her view sexual harassment occurred is hardly inconsequential. The fact that the parties were not able to come to terms on such provision provides powerful evidence that no contract had yet been formed’.
Judge Liman also disagreed with Lively’s pleading that she could sue using the ALA because of Baldoni’s discussions about it.
The ruling stated: ‘The court disagrees. Considering Lively’s evidence both in isolation and as a whole, it fails to raise a genuine issue of material fact concerning formation of the ALA’.
Justin BaldoniBlake Lively
