Blake Lively has filed a motion in a New York federal court demanding $8,035,040.88 in legal fees and expenses from actor-director Justin Baldoni and his Wayfarer Studios. The submission, made public on Tuesday, follows a May settlement that resolved the core dispute between the two “It Ends With Us” co-stars but left the question of costs to the court. The sum covers nearly $7.5 million in attorney fees from two law firms and approximately $540,000 in other litigation costs.

The request rests on a ruling by US District Judge Lewis J. Liman, who determined that Lively is entitled to recover costs under Section 47.1 of the California Civil Code. That provision shields individuals from retaliatory defamation suits after they report sexual harassment or discrimination. The judge dismissed Baldoni’s $400 million defamation and extortion countersuit against Lively and her husband Ryan Reynolds, finding no evidence of malice. He also dismissed Lively’s own sexual harassment claims, citing her status as an independent contractor, but allowed her to seek reimbursement for defending against the countersuit.

Lively’s legal team, led by Michael Gottlieb and Esra Hudson, argues that Baldoni and Wayfarer employed “scorched-earth litigation tactics” designed to drain her resources, including a near-daily press campaign and expansive discovery demands. They contend the work was “comprehensive and necessary” to secure the dismissal. Baldoni’s representatives have not yet responded to the motion; the court has given them until 13 July to contest the amount. In earlier proceedings, Baldoni denied all allegations of misconduct and a smear campaign, claiming Lively fabricated claims to seize creative control of the film.

The legal feud erupted in December 2024 when Lively accused Baldoni of sexual harassment on set and orchestrating a campaign to destroy her reputation. Baldoni countersued, alleging defamation and extortion. Both suits were dismissed, and the parties reached a confidential settlement in May, avoiding trial. The current motion is a procedural step to enforce the cost-shifting provision. Judge Liman will review the requested amount after Baldoni’s response, with a decision expected later this summer. The case has drawn international attention, with media in Europe, Latin America, and Asia covering the high-profile Hollywood dispute, though the legal outcome will turn on the application of California’s anti-SLAPP-style protections.