Justin Baldoni’s lawyer cites ‘Heated Rivalry’ in bid to dismiss Blake Lively lawsuit

Justin Baldoni’s legal team cited HBO’s Heated Rivalry, arguing on-set improvisation does not equal harassment case

Lawyers for Justin Baldoni appeared in federal court on Thursday seeking dismissal of Blake Lively’s lawsuit, which alleges sexual harassment and retaliation during the production of the 2024 film It Ends With Us.

The motion was heard by U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman, who has not yet ruled on the matter.

Baldoni’s attorney, Jonathan Bach, argued that the disputed conduct occurred during the filming of intimate scenes and stemmed from improvisation between actors rather than gender-based harassment. During his argument, Bach referenced HBO Max’s romantic drama Heated Rivalry to illustrate how improvised physicality between actors, including explicit scenes, does not automatically constitute discrimination. The reference prompted laughter in the courtroom when Judge Liman acknowledged he was unfamiliar with the series.

Bach maintained that any touching between Baldoni and Lively was tied to their characters’ relationship and not motivated by Lively’s gender. He emphasized that Lively agreed to participate in a film featuring “steamy” and emotionally intense scenes. Judge Liman pushed back on the notion that a project’s sexual content grants unlimited freedom on set, prompting Bach to stress that “context matters” and that the alleged incidents were insufficient to meet the legal standard for sexual harassment.

Representing Lively, attorney Esra Hudson countered that key facts remain in dispute and should be evaluated by a jury. She argued that Lively experienced unconsented kissing and physical contact during filming, despite expectations of intimacy. Hudson highlighted the role of consent discussions, nudity riders, and intimacy coordinators in defining acceptable improvisation.

Judge Liman questioned both sides on how consent applies in improvised scenes but ultimately took the arguments under submission. The case is currently scheduled to proceed to trial in May, though the court may narrow the claims before then.