A judge on Monday decided not to place restrictions on Justin Baldoni’s attorney regarding discussions about his legal dispute with Blake Lively, but cautioned that the trial date set for March 2026 could be moved up if the media conflict persists. Judge Lewis J. Liman oversaw the initial hearing in the extensive legal battle between the two co-stars of “It Ends With Us” in federal court in New York. Neither of them was present in the courtroom.
Blake Lively has accused Baldoni and others of tarnishing her reputation in the media after she raised concerns about sexual harassment on set. In response, Baldoni launched defamation lawsuits against Lively, her husband Ryan Reynolds, and the New York Times. His attorney, Bryan Freedman, has been actively engaging in a public relations campaign to counter Lively’s accusations.
Leading up to the hearing, Lively’s legal team sought to control Freedman’s statements to the press to avoid prejudicing the jury pool. They also expressed concerns about Freedman’s intention to create a website, thelawsuitinfo.com, to share court documents related to the case. The judge instructed both parties to abide by the New York Rules of Professional Conduct, which prohibit attorneys from making statements that could significantly influence a jury. However, attorneys are allowed to speak to the media to safeguard their clients from unfavorable publicity.
Despite this, no additional restrictions were imposed by the judge. Following the hearing, Freedman expressed satisfaction with the proceedings outside the courthouse, emphasizing the desire to expedite the case and prove innocence swiftly. Baldoni’s legal team recently expanded their complaint to include defamation claims against the New York Times, indicating a shift from a prior defamation suit filed against the same publication in Los Angeles.
The revised lawsuit alleges that the Times collaborated with Lively’s team to defame Baldoni by misrepresenting text messages from his PR team. Baldoni’s lawyers contend that metadata on the Times’ website suggests that the paper had access to Lively’s civil rights complaint well before publishing the story on December 21.
In summary, the legal battle between the parties continues with evolving claims and counterclaims, as the focus remains on swift resolution and proving innocence amidst a backdrop of media attention and public scrutiny.
