Blake Lively vs Justin Baldoni: Fresh twist as actress demands clarity ahead of trial

The legal dispute between Hollywood actors Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni is escalating ahead of a crucial trial, with new filings shedding light on mounting tensions between the two sides.

According to a report by USA Today, Lively’s legal team has approached the court seeking clarity on whether Baldoni and his co-defendants will testify in person or via deposition during the upcoming proceedings.

In a letter dated April 7 to US District Judge Lewis Liman, Lively’s attorneys alleged that Baldoni and others involved in the case have not confirmed how they intend to present their testimony — a detail they argue is critical for trial preparation.

Dispute Over Trial Testimony Plans

The issue centres on whether key individuals, including Baldoni, will appear physically in court or provide testimony remotely. According to USA Today, Lively’s lawyers claim that despite attempts to communicate “in good faith,” the defence has not provided clear answers.

They argued that this lack of clarity could leave the actress at a disadvantage, as decisions regarding witness sequencing, legal strategy and evidence presentation depend heavily on knowing how testimonies will be delivered.

Lively’s team has asked the court to direct Baldoni and his co-defendants to respond by April 8. They have also requested additional time to finalise their own pretrial filings if the information is not provided promptly.

The case involves several individuals linked to the production of It Ends with Us. Baldoni’s co-defendants include Wayfarer Studios CEO Jamey Heath, cofounder Steve Sarowitz, crisis PR specialist Melissa Nathan and publicist Jennifer Abel, according to the report.

Lively’s legal team suggested that the delay in sharing testimony plans may be deliberate, describing it as a move that “appears designed to manufacture a strategic advantage.”

The dispute stems from a 2024 complaint filed in California, later followed by a lawsuit in New York federal court.

Lively alleged that Baldoni and Heath engaged in inappropriate workplace behaviour during the making of It Ends with Us, and subsequently orchestrated a retaliatory smear campaign against her.

However, in a ruling dated April 2, Judge Liman narrowed the scope of the case. Out of 13 claims filed by Lively, only three — breach of contract, retaliation, and aiding and abetting retaliation — were allowed to proceed to trial.

The remaining claims, including those related to sexual harassment and defamation, were dismissed. According to the report, the court cited jurisdictional issues, noting that the alleged incidents did not occur in California, where the claims had been filed.

Legal experts often point out that whether a witness appears in person or via deposition can significantly influence courtroom dynamics.

Lively’s attorneys emphasised in their letter that the “presence or absence” of Baldoni and other defendants could impact everything from witness examination to pretrial rulings.

They argued that without this “straightforward information,” Lively’s ability to prepare effectively for trial is compromised.

The trial between Lively and Baldoni is currently scheduled to begin on May 18.

With deadlines for pretrial submissions fast approaching, the dispute over testimony logistics adds another layer of complexity to an already high-profile case.

As per the report, the coming days are expected to be crucial in determining how both sides proceed — and whether the court intervenes to resolve the standoff.