JustinIts production company Wafer's Studios was sued against LLC New York Times Due to the defamation case against publication in September 2025.

Baldni and Wafer Basically New York Times The outlet that hated the actor for his coverage because of the $ 250 million dollar in December 2021 Blake Lively'S Harassment Against him It ends with us Director and Caster.

Baldni and his associates complained New York Times "We can bury someone in December 2021 in December 2021 to mislead the readers' conflict with" cherry-selling "information" inside a Hollywood smart machine ". New York Times Consistently stands behind his report.

An important legal disaster Baldoni and Wafer were held on June 2025 Judge Luis J Liman Baldoni's defamation case against both The New York Times And his $ 400 million countersut against Lively. After three months, New York Times Baldoni's dismissed legal action against Waferer was to retrieve at least $ 5,700, according to a court document received Our weeklyThe

Continue scrolling to do the whole Roundown of the case.

Why does Justin Baldney sued in the New York Times?

Ours Confirmed that Baldoni and Weefer were in a group of 10 plaintiffs - including preachers Melissa Nathan And Jennifer AbellPlus It ends with us Producer James Heath And Steve Saraotz - who started legal activities against who New York Times In the December 2024 article "We can bury anyone: inside a Hollywood Smair Machine" "

Was the main one of their complaints New York Times And its journalists Megan, Mike And Tat It seems that Baldoni is "cherry-selling and snatched in the necessary context to make the vivid appearance of his sexual harassment." Allegedly accused in the case - the actor who also shifted the same - a "strategic and manifestor" to add one -sided control of unilateral control over the production of sexual harassment for being involved in media propaganda (its It ends with us) "

“The Time The story relied almost entirely on the verification of Lively and the self-deprecating narrative, ignoring the Verbatim, ignoring a lot of evidence that opposed his claim and expressed his true objectives, "Baldney and his colleague complained of filing their case.

Baldani specifically rejected the allegations Time The article he had entered in Lively repeatedly It ends with us When the trailer showed a "porn video" of a fellow manufacturer's wife while breastfeeding.

"This claim is obviously unreasonable," the legal group of Baldoni insisted on their case. “The video in the question was (non-pornographic) recording (producer HeathWife at home birth - deep personal who has no sexual overtone. This gentle phenomenon is distorted in an activity of sexual abuse, and the length of his associates and his associates who want to insult the plaintiffs are horribly and symbolic. "

In response to the Wafer's defamation case, a New York Times Spokesperson Ours That is "the role of an independent news agency" to follow where they lead. "

A representative of the outlet responded, "Our story was reported perfectly and responsibly." These texts and emails were also a discriminatory claim filed by Justin Baldoni in California and his associates by Blake Lively. "

According to the spokesperson, New York Times "Has planned to be strongly defended against the case."

Why was Justin Baldoni's case against the New York Times dismissed?

Baldoni was twice as if Judge Liman dismissed both cases against him in June 2021 New York Times And his $ 400 million countersut against Lively.

"Wafer's parties did not complain that the vibrant responsible other than the statement of his CRD complaint," judge Liman on June 9, filed his opinion and order. To accuse Weefer's parties to engage in a memory campaign. "

The judge also said, "However, Wafer's teams did not complain that Renolds, Sloves or Times seriously suspected that these statements were true on the basis of information available to them, as they needed to be responsible for defamation under the applicable law. Additional claims of Waferra's party also failed.

Judge Lyman gave Baldoni and his legal party a chance to amend the agreements to the agreement involved in the agreement and the abusive intervention, though the filmmaker's lawyer Liked to make it notThe

Baldoni's attorney ” Brian Friedman Stated Man In June 2021. "The discovery is proceeding (in the case of Lively) and we are confident that we will win against this true baseless allegation. Instead of correcting existing claims, our clients will follow the additional legal options available for us."

Lively Esra Hudson And Mike Gotlib In one statement that Countersut has admired the dismissal as "a total victory and a complete authentication for Blake Livley" OursThe

"As we said from the first day, this '400 million dollar' case was a shame, and the court saw it right away," they said at the time. "We are looking forward to the next round, which have suggested that this offensive case is seeking those who are seeking attornees' fees, triggered losses and disciplinary compensation against Baldni, Sarovits, Nathan and other weef."

Why did the New York Times Justin Baldoni and Weefer sued?

The New York Times agency sought at least $ 5,700 "compensation and disciplinary loss" related to Baldoni's dismissal defamation in September 2021, according to the filing of the court, according to the filing of the court. OursThe

The company has been accused of violating the New York anti-Slap law against the case, which is "forced to spend time and resources on the baseless case, and the publishers want to prevent them from exercising by exercising." If Baldoni seems to have violated the law, he and Weefer's associates will have to pay "expenses and attorney fees" related to their original case.

"It is now well established that the news coverage of public interest falls in the covers of the law," the New York Times Filed the case.

Legal filed Baldoni incorrectly accused of allegedly “False Light” and “Promise fraud” New York TimesEspecially "we can bury anyone: inside a Hollywood smirry machine." In his original filing, accused of Baldoni New York Times Violating the promise of publishing the article "December 21, 2024" to give adequate time to respond to the filmmaker.

New York Times According to the publication, the article was published exactly after 10am on December 21, but only after receiving comments from the Attorney for Wafer and its affiliated companies ".

"The revised complaint tried to create the email that the article that would not be published before noon on December 21, 2024," the Time'The legal party argued.

The New York Times later alleged that Baldoni's defamation demanded in June 2021, June 2021, proved that the actor's allegations were "a lack of any basis in the law."

"The District Court has made clear the views that both Waferer and its allied agencies have launched and continued the case against time on the basis of actual and on the basis of law," New York Times Seer

The New York Times agency New York Civil Rights Act is seeking "reasonable expenditure, attorns' fees and distribution", as well as "the court to be justified and appropriate for further relief."

In response to this latest case, Baldoni's lawyer Friedman says Man: "Win, lose or draw, we refuse the power brokers' caves in the face of seemingly impossible adversities."

Friedman also said, "We continue to stand taller for a reason: the pursuit of truth in the face of the giants," "Whatever our disrespect, adversity or consequences to compromise with our values, stand for the truth and stand for the right things to stand for the right things.

Meanwhile, Lively's sexual harassment against Baldoni may begin in March 2026.