Blake Lively’s huge alleged wardrobe spend on The It Ends With Us set has been detailed in Justin Baldoni’s lawsuit documents.
The legal fight erupted just before Christmas when the glamorous blonde, 37, sued her It Ends With Us co-star Baldoni, 41, for sexual harassment, which he denied.
At the same time, the New York Times released a story based on Lively’s legal filing that accused him of orchestrating a negative publicity campaign against her.
In turn, Baldoni sued the Times for defamation and launched a $400m lawsuit against Lively and her husband Reynolds that accused her of using her celebrity power to hijack his film and attempt to torpedo his career – the Times and Blake Lively have denied these claims.
Bombshell legal documents on Baldoni’s explosive new website claim the budget for the film ballooned by $430,000 after Lively allegedly demanded her wardrobe be ‘re-shopped’ to match her vision for the character of Lily Bloom.
The legal documents further claim Lively ‘often’ refused to go for fittings at the production office 15 minutes from her Manhattan home and allegedly demanded the outfits be shipped to her at great extra expense.
Blake Lively’s huge alleged wardrobe spend on The It Ends With Us set has been detailed in Justin Baldoni ‘s lawsuit documents – Lively pictured filming in May 2023
The legal fight erupted just before Christmas when the glamorous blonde, 37, sued her It Ends With Us co-star Baldoni, 41, for sexual harassment. At the same time, the New York Times released a story based on Lively’s legal filing that accused him of orchestrating a negative publicity campaign against her – the pair are pictured in It Ends With Us
A message from the Line Producer on the film dated April 25 2023 reads: ‘Wardrobe’s budget for spending is $185k.
‘Normally wardrobe overspends and then does tons of returns and ends up in budget. Our Wardrobe team told me they’d spend about $500k and then land back at $185k once returns are done
‘To date they’ve already spent $615K and they need their cashet cards all replenished because they’ve only shopped for Justin and Blake.
‘They had to reshop everything for Blake after creative changes but it’s a lot of money.
‘I trust them of course but want to keep you all posted as this is way more than I’ve ever seen wardrobe go over budget with the initial spend.
‘At this point we have to replenish their cards because they haven’t shopped for the other characters. Just keeping you all posted.’
Legal documents claim Lively was ‘ignoring the director’s vision for her character and disposing of the weeks of effort and creativity spent by the wardrobe team on shopping and carefully crafting her wardrobe’ and ‘sent hundreds of images to the Film’s costume designer’… depicting the style of wardrobe she wanted for her character.’
The court papers claim the costume designer had to ‘re-shop Lively’s wardrobe, far exceeding the allocated budget and diverting time and resources, while also preparing wardrobes for the rest of the cast.
Bombshell legal documents on Baldoni’s explosive new website claim the budget for the film ballooned by $430,000 after Lively allegedly demanded her wardrobe be ‘re-shopped’ to match her vision for the character of Lily Bloom – seen filming May 25, 2023
The legal documents further claim Lively ‘often’ refused to go for fittings at the production office 15 minutes from her Manhattan home and allegedly demanded the outfits be shipped to her at great extra expense – pictured filming with Brandon Sklenar on May 18 2023
‘At one point, Lively insisted that her character “had money” and could afford $5,000 shoes—despite being a fledgling small business owner. This forced Baldoni to rethink the entire script that had been in the works for well over a year and was approved by both Sony and Wayfarer – a script that Wayfarer had commissioned multiple drafts of and incorporated countless notes (including input from the book’s author, Colleen Hoover).’
Lively was also accused of ‘insisting’ that the ‘costume department pack up wardrobe and deliver it to her personal residence.
The documents read: ‘Loading the wardrobe department on trucks and delivering the contents to Lively’s home in the middle of congested Manhattan for fittings cost time and money—always in short supply on any major film.
‘Requests of this nature are typically made during contract negotiations; since Lively made no such request at the time, this added expense was not included in the budget. Lively, who had a greater obligation to the studios as an executive producer, paid no heed to budget constraints, let alone to the months of planning that had already been completed.’
The documents claim Baldoni and the studio ‘ceded full control to Lively over her wardrobe’ in an ‘effort to maintain harmony’ and ‘avoid further delays’ which would later prove ‘regrettable.’
There was a reported backlash from Sony when paparazzi photos of Lively wearing her new wardrobe while filming on May 15 2023 were published – with the images ‘widely reported as unflattering.’
The lawsuit claims: ‘Baldoni received direct criticism from Sony, who voiced serious concerns about the impact of the photos on the Film’s public reception.’
It was further claimed Baldoni had approached Lively in her trailer while she was with her team to discuss ‘necessary wardrobe adjustments, reassert his role as director, and get her on board with him having approval over her character’s wardrobe.’
Lively is pictured filming with Baldoni on May 15 2023
This comes after their lawyers raised new allegations in their hotly contested case in court on Monday; seen on December 4, 2024
Baldoni’s attorney Bryan Freedman pleaded with the judge to move the case forward as quickly as possible because his client was ‘suffering greatly’
The lawsuit claims this chat was ‘grossly misrepresented’ in Lively’s complaint which branded his exchange as a ‘lengthy outburst’ which delayed filming and caused the crew to wait while ‘[Baldoni] cried in Lively’s dressing room.’
DailyMail.com has contacted Blake Lively’s representatives for comment.
This comes after Lively’s lawyers raised new allegations in their hotly contested case against Baldoni in court on Monday.
Baldoni’s attorney, Bryan Freedman, pleaded with the judge to move the case forward as quickly as possible because his client was ‘suffering greatly.’
Lively’s lawyer Michael Gottlieb, however, vehemently denied the claim that Lively was purposely dragging her heels in the lawsuit.
Judge Lewis Liman denied a move from Lively and her husband Ryan Reynolds to gag Team Baldoni following the series of bombshell claims made by his legal team.
But Gottlieb said they intend to hit Baldoni with fresh allegations in Lively’s sexual harassment case, and insisted that protecting the couple’s celebrity friends was going to be ‘very important.’
Gottlieb told the court during the hearing that they intend to add ‘both claims and parties’ to a revised complaint which will be filed by Valentine’s Day.
Last week, Baldoni updated his own complaint in his $400 million defamation case against the Gossip Girl star which accused Lively of giving The New York Times advanced access to her complaint of sexual harassment during the filming of the movie It Ends With Us.
Gottlieb attacked Freedman for making statements outside of court which had challenged the ‘character, integrity and truthfulness’ of Lively.
After complaining, Lively’s lawyers were told was that ‘we (Lively) started it’ with the New York Times article, Gottlieb said.
Gottlieb cited an interview in People magazine in which Freedman accused Lively of a ‘pattern of bullying.’
In another statement Freedman claimed that if Lively really was sexually harassed she wouldn’t have returned to the film.
A skeptical Judge Liman said: ‘isn’t that what’s stated in his complaint?’
Gottlieb said no and that lawyers were ‘not supposed to launch attacks on another party’s character’.
He added that the leaking of raw footage from It Ends With Us was ‘particularly concerning’ because it could start an ‘arms race’ whereby lawyers have to appear in the media to fire back at every disclosure.
‘If there’s no guard rails in place….we (the attorneys) have to and go out on shows arguing on shows what a particular document or video means’.
Freedman fired back that the statements had ‘not been a one way street’ and tried to walk the court through a number made by Lively’s lawyers.
After listening to them, Judge Liman said Freedman ‘went a little bit further’ than Lively’s lawyers.
The judge said that he was adopting rules for lawyers known as Rule 3.6 which bars both of them from making extrajudicial statements that could influence the jury.
Judge Liman said he was ‘hesitant to adopt it’ but after both sides agreed to it, he changed his mind.
He said: ‘My expectation is the parties will comply with their ethical obligations. I don’t expect this case to devolve into satellite litigation over the comments of a lawyer.
‘Both have said a lot in the pleadings that give the public plenty to feast upon’.
Freedman tried to protest and said: ‘Not to sound like a four year old fighting a four year old with ‘but they started it’ but once someone says something it becomes fact, there’s no way to fight against it.
‘You start to lose things without the ability to have the court’s adjudication. This was not started by us.’
Judge Liman also warned that if both sides didn’t behave themselves he could move the date of the trial forward from March next year.
Judge Lewis Liman denied a move from Lively and her husband Ryan Reynolds to gag Team Baldoni following the series of bombshell claims made by his legal team
He said: ‘I’m not going to do that, I’m convinced the parties need the time for discovery.
‘But if it turns out that this ends up being litigated in the press in a way that would prejudice the opportunity of a fair trial…one of the tools the court has is to accelerate the date of the trial.
‘That’s something that is out there. I don’t want to do that.’
Earlier in the hearing, Gottlieb, who also represents Reynolds, said that he would be seeking a protective order through the court for future filings to protect the couple’s celebrity friends.
While he did not name Taylor Swift, she would likely be one of those affected as she was referred to in Baldoni’s complaint.
Gottlieb said: ‘We do believe there will be provisions in a protective order that will be appropriate in this case given the nature of the allegations and the high profile nature of some of the individuals who will be involved.
Baldoni’s legal fight with Lively began after she sued him for sexual harassment just days before Christmas
‘There is a significant number of high profile individuals on both sides.
‘In particular addressing the interests and needs of third parties is going to be very important in this case.’
Gottlieb said he would plan to ‘seek protections we believe will be very important particularly in a case where there’s been a significant amount of leaking materials.’
He said: ‘We do intend to propose a protective order in this case.’
Judge Liman agreed and said that even before the other parties were named ‘you already got a lot of high profile people’ involved.
Baldoni’s lawyer Bryan Freedman said he would be prepared to agree to the order.
Gottlieb also talked about discovery and how there will be a significant amount about how Baldoni and the other defendants used the media to ‘shape and push forward’ their retaliation strategy.
He also talked about finding material on ‘individuals who may have been paid for taking certain positions in public.’
Freedman, who represents Baldoni and his PR team, asked the judge in todays first court hearing to move the case forward as quickly as possible because his clients were ‘suffering greatly.’
