Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni settle lawsuit

0:00This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK.

0:30appointment at luriechildrens.org slash schaumburg. Lurie Children's, all for your one. When it's your child's heart, it's everything. At Lurie Children's, we bring the expertise of a nationally ranked heart center to every concern, caring for children with both routine and complex conditions, including those that require specialized care. Our specialists focus entirely on children, supporting them and their families through every stage of care, from early diagnosis through treatment and recovery. Lurie Children's. All for your one.

1:14Hello and welcome back to Fame Under Fire from BBC Sounds with me, Anishka Matanda-Doughty. Wait, Blake, Blake, one more look back. Over the shoulder, Blake. That is Blake Lively at the 2026 Met Gala. After a four-year hiatus, she was back on the red carpet just as the news was breaking that Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni have officially agreed to a settlement in their legal battle. This is just two weeks, two weeks before the trial was due to begin on the 18th of May. Now this has been going on since 2024. The Hollywood legal battle began when Blake Lively sued Justin Baldoni and others accusing him of harassment and a smear campaign on the set of the movie It Ends With Us.

1:52He denied it and countersued but that lawsuit was eventually dismissed. Now in April 2026 a federal judge dismissed most of the claims Blake Lively made in her lawsuit. Judge Lewis Lyman threw out 10 of the 13 allegations in Lively's case including harassment and defamation. There were three claims left in place now that's breach of contract, retaliation and aiding and abetting in retaliation. So the civil trial had become a whole lot narrower. Some say more focused some so narrower. Now both sides have issued a joint statement. This was released on the 4th of May. It says the parties in the Blake Lively and Wayfarer Studios litigation have reached an agreement to resolve the matters and issue the following joint statement.

2:32The end product, the movie It Ends With Us, is a source of pride to all of us who work to bring it to life. Raising awareness and making a meaningful impact in the lives of domestic violence survivors and all survivors is a goal that we stand behind. We acknowledge the process, presented challenges and recognize concerns raised by Miss Lively deserved to be heard. We remain firmly committed to workplaces free of improprieties and unproductive environments. It is our sincere hope that this brings closure and allows all involved to move forward constructively and in peace, including a respectful environment online.

3:05Okay, it ends with us. It ends with that. Joining me right now is our resident trial attorney, Sean Kent. Hi, Sean. Hey, Anushka. How are you guys doing? Sean, I just read out that statement. Now, you are very particular about statements? Who makes them, when they're made, what they say? What do you think of that one? It was a joint statement from the defendants and the claimant. I can promise you the settlement process was much easier than coming up with this statement. And so reading in between the lines and reading on that statement, it is very nuanced. It is very clear that the lawyers, because they gave it together, that they told both parties they were not allowed to discuss this thing whatsoever.

3:47And so everybody wanted to put their two cents in. So they wanted to make sure a nuanced statement that said absolutely nothing while saying everything at the same time, because if you read it, it is a bunch of legal mumbo jumbo for we've reached a settlement. Blake and Justin ain't going to give you guys any comments whatsoever. It's done. Everybody move on. I mean, it's the nebulous way of what that statement says. What's very interesting is neither Justin or Blake said anything whatsoever. So I think that was part of the settlement that they're not allowed to talk about it whatsoever. And it doesn't include an apology from either side.

4:24And I thought the bit that was interesting is we want to make meaningful impact in the lives of domestic violence survivors and all survivors. The film centered around domestic violence survivors. Is there anything we can glean from the inclusion of all survivors, given that a lot of this revolved around the accusation of sexual harassment? We've dealt with these situations. As you know, we've had some cases where we have those non-disclosure things. And so what happens are both sides submit proposals. Blake's side talked about sexual harassment in the workforce, all of these other things. And the other side says, we're not going to mention any of that.

4:55And so it just pared down, pared down, pared down until they got to the word survivors. And so that's how you can tell it was a statement that both of them put together that both of them could live with. But let's get into that, that not talking. What happens, we're assuming this is a closed door deal. So it's taken place. Maybe money's exchanged hands. Maybe it hasn't. But neither side are going to make a public statement. What happens if you violate that, if you break that? And that's the thing that's going to be such the guess, because usually there is a contract that none of us are privy to that talks about specifically what will happen in the result of breach.

5:28This is a contract. Whatever we say, their settlement is simply a contract. As you and I have mentioned, a contract is a bargain for exchange between two parties. Now, I'm going to give the legal definition contract because you pick on me. But there is a contract between the two. And if someone violates that contract, there are terms inside of there. So let's say for argument's sake, Blake says that Justin's team or Wayfair has violated the terms of the contract. She can sue for that. Maybe inside of the contract, there's a term that gives a certain amount of monetary damages. Or specifically, she can repudiate or cut the entire agreement up and go back to her lawsuit.

6:09That could be inside of there. She could bring her lawsuit back if one of the sides violates their terms of the contract. I don't believe that's in there, and here's why, because you and I have talked about the whole phrase, statute of limitations. Let's say for argument's sake, Justin violates the terms of this contract in three years. Well, she can't bring her lawsuit back then. You understand? Because it's past the time where she could have brought her case. So probably there's some type of monetary damages or some type of penalty that can be put in there if one of the sides violates. now blake lively's team were adamant they were not going to settle they were going to trial we spoke to them we spoke to the lawyers they said we are going to trial she wants to get up on the stand and tell her story and they made multiple public statements that echoed this now there is a settlement sean it feels as if sean kent would have come in and gone don't make any public statement saying you're not going to settle this because you're going to bite yourself in the butt later on.

7:07Would you stand by that? Stand by that. It happens every time. Every time we see and where it happens more is in the criminal parlance is when defense attorneys without getting the discovery get in front of a camera and say, we maintain his innocence. He has done nothing wrong. There's nothing to say that. And then they get the discovery and they're like, we're just going to work a deal and we're going to plead really quickly. People give these ideas and they give these statements without knowing what's going on because it's new and fresh. And they believe it was emboldened. We are chanting up.

7:38We are champions for women's rights. We are going to fight to the very end. And all of a sudden they get all the evidence. They're like, yeah, we ain't doing this. And Justin's team, we're not going to let this go. We're going to do everything. Justin, if you don't settle, then all of this information is going to come out. Let's work this out. So everybody is trying to win Anushka, the court of public opinion at the very beginning. And they want to give these great statements and get these great soundbites because they're really trying to influence a potential jury. And so there is something to be said that all of these statements they gave at the beginning were really just in case they end up in front of a jury.

8:13And just in case somebody on that jury may see something they said. But in the grand scheme of things, they probably realistically knew this was never going to go to trial. And then there is something to the fact that this happened on the night of the Met Gala. The Met Gala, which showcases high fashion or fashion as art as it was this year the who's who of everybody even Beyonce this year turned up oh absolutely everything is carefully orchestrated I hate those things when people come in there wearing bright colors and yellows and all that weird stuff it's really just weird to me Sean's wearing a bright yellow suit with a paisley tie y 'all and he's petitioning Anna Wintour invite me invite me I'm coming yeah yeah as you know in the news media, there's certain days of the week that if you want to bury a story, you release them.

9:02You release stories on Friday mid-afternoons and things of that nature if you want them to be buried. And it's the same situation in this. They knew that people are going to be more focused on one. Let's release the settlement so everyone's not talking about it the way that they used to be. So there's no doubt in my mind it was carefully planned, carefully orchestrated. This is the day that we choose to release it so we can get the least bad press possible. And then the other element of this is the court. So this is the Southern District of New York court, which has civil trials, civil cases and criminal cases as well.

9:35Now, we know that the court already said you need to come in here and try mediation again to try and reach a conclusion when they both turned up wearing the same color of green and set the internet on fire and they couldn't reach a settlement then. Is the court's interest always in trying to get them to settle throughout the entire thing. Yeah, it is. Yes. And do you think that's increased in this case because of the amount of high profile people that were attached to this? Taylor Swift, Ryan Reynolds, like logistically, this is a bit of a nightmare for the court and the court officers. So they're like, settle, settle, settle.

10:07Well, here's a great way to look at it, Anushka. We want to balance court resources and court time. You know, how many times have we've talked about Americans are litigious by nature and we sue a lot. and you only have a finite amount of time and resources. And if the court docket is clogged up with just working on Blake and Wayfair, they can't do other means of justice. Here's something that people don't realize, and maybe they do, the same judge who is watching and dealing with Blake's case for the next three weeks or however long it is also handles criminal matters, okay? And so for that, So let's say the Blake case is taking three, four, five weeks of civil worrying about money.

10:51And there's somebody who is languishing in jail and can't get out, can't get a bond, can't get their hearing. He's got to wait until they're done with that. And not just him, all of those folks. So a lot of time the court is saying, let's move this along so we can take care of other matters that are even more pressing for the court's decision. Yeah. And if we cast our minds back to March, that's exactly what happened then. This case was supposed to be taken to court in March and the judge said criminal cases take precedent, pushed it back to May. And now it is no more. Sean, I don't think this is the last time we're ever going to talk about this.

11:23Probably in two years time when everybody's NDAs run out, there might be a tell-all interview. It's going to come out. As hard as we try, terms come out and you say, well, how is that possible? It's just like, oh, you know what I heard? And all of a sudden they're on TMZ, they're on TikTok and they're saying, And this is what I've heard the terms are. Yeah. And what are they? And they're a source post to the story. Amen. Sean, no one's taken the stand. No one's told their story, but there still is, in the eyes of the public, going to be a winner here. Who do you think that is? In the eyes of the public, just from my perception, watching on, reading the filings, watching the social media pundits, I think the clear winner is the Wayfair Baldoni side.

12:08not because of anything dealing with the logistics, but in the grand scheme of things, who actually lost more. Blake's reputation is, and this happens from the filing of lawsuits. People need to understand that. You file lawsuits, your reputation can become tarnished. And when we advise clients, Anushka, we tell them this, that you could win the battle but lose the war. And they're like, oh, this is more important than money. This is more important. I need to get my message out there. And then at the end of the day, they're like, sheesh, I wish I would not have done that. And I think anybody paying any attention whatsoever is.

12:45And please, Justin Baldoni, people don't come for me. I had no clue who Justin Baldoni was until all of this stuff started, but I basically knew who Blake Lively was. And so her reputation for me, who is just know her from being married to Ryan Reynolds, went from here to here. And I think that's happened to a lot of people. and I think even her saying her endorsements, the way people think about her, the way people are looking at her, has been lessened just from the filing of this lawsuit. And I guarantee you, if you are a fly on the wall with her lawyer, some lawyer sitting there right now and going, was it worth it?

13:20We told you you might not want to do this. So I think there's a clear winner in my view. Well, we'll see what remains. You know, the internet has a short memory and I was seeing underneath a lot of the posts of her at the Met Gala was pretty positive. It was the most positive stuff I've seen about her in ages. America loves an understag and America loves a redemption story. She can make a comeback. Yeah, there's a lot of people screaming at the TV right now. He's Raphael! He's Raphael! You don't know who that is, but I'm going to send you some TikToks later. No, I'm good. Yes, Raphael. He's Raphael!

13:49He's Raphael! Sean, thank you so much. You've been with us on this since the beginning. It ends with this interview. We're moving on. The other cases we have coming up that we're going to be covering is the Andrew Tate civil case in the UK, the Russell Brand criminal trial in the UK, the Kanye West, different pieces of civil litigation that are happening towards the end of the year. And we, of course, have our eyes on that Tupac case and that David case that may be making its way towards the courtroom. Sean, thank you as always. Thank you for having me, Niska. Much appreciated. That was our resident trial attorney, Sean Kent from South Carolina.

14:23And that's it for this episode of Fame Under Fire from BBC Sounds. Make sure you subscribe and turn on your push notifications so you never miss a thing. Please welcome your Any Questions panel. Hello, I'm Alex Forsyth, host of Radio 4's Any Questions. If you don't know the programme, this is what it's about. Every Friday, I'm joined by politicians, journalists and public figures who answer questions directly from a live audience, giving you real views, real challenges and real conversations about the issues shaping our lives. We take our lively debate to communities across the UK where they get to ask the questions about the topics that matter the most.

15:05Live political debate where the audience drives the agenda. Any questions, every Friday night at 8pm on Radio 4 or subscribe on BBC Sounds so that you never miss an episode.