‘DOA’: Judge Kills Blake Lively’s Emotional Distress Claims After She Refuses to Release Medical Records in Baldoni Lawsuit

The already chaotic legal battle initiated by actress Blake Lively against her It Ends With Us director and co-star, Justin Baldoni, has hit a catastrophic dead end. In a stunning rebuke of Lively’s tactics, U.S. District Judge Lewis J. Liman has ruled that her central claims of intentional and negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress (IED) are now, for all intents and purposes, dead on arrival (DOA).

This is not a mere setback; it’s a monumental collapse that exposes the core fragility of Lively’s lawsuit. The dramatic pivot occurred when Baldoni’s legal team, in a brilliant counter-move, demanded that Lively produce her mental health and therapy records—a standard requirement when claiming IED damages. Rather than comply and allow her medical history to be scrutinized, Lively’s team moved to withdraw the claims, hoping to do so without prejudice to preserve her right to refile them later. Judge Liman flatly denied this request, calling her bluff and forcing a definitive end to the issue, ensuring she “will preclude Lively from offering any evidence of emotional distress” in the future.

The judge’s ruling confirmed what critics had suspected: Lively’s claim was a performative centerpiece of her legal strategy designed to leverage public sympathy, but one that lacked the necessary medical evidence to withstand legal scrutiny.

The Judge Calls the Hollywood Bluff

For months, Blake Lively’s legal strategy has been criticized as being more focused on PR stunts than legal substance. Her lawyers initially argued that Baldoni’s alleged actions had caused her “extreme” emotional distress, grief, fear, trauma, and anxiety. This type of claim, however, requires verifiable proof, specifically medical and mental health records that Baldoni’s team immediately moved to compel through a HIPAA release.

Lively’s response was a swift, silent retreat. She requested to dismiss the claims, but crucially, asked for it to be without prejudice—a move Baldoni’s attorneys correctly argued was an attempt to simultaneously “refuse to disclose the information” and “maintain the right to re-file” later at her convenience. The judge saw through the maneuver.

Judge Liman’s ruling was clear and unsparing, denying her request to walk away cleanly. While he denied Baldoni’s motion to compel the records (since the claims were being withdrawn), he issued a devastating caveat: if those IED claims are not formally dismissed, Lively will be barred from ever introducing evidence of emotional distress again. This ruling boxed her in completely, forcing her to surrender one of the most significant components of her damages claim rather than submit her medical history for discovery. It was the legal equivalent of a public slap, signaling to both parties that the courtroom is not a stage for celebrity theatrics.

The Friendship Fallout: Taylor Swift Ghosts Blake

The courtroom humiliation is mirrored by a devastating personal blow: the reported collapse of Lively’s decade-long friendship with superstar Taylor Swift. Amid the swirling legal chaos, sources have confirmed that Swift is completely ghosting Lively, ignoring her frantic texts, voicemails, and emails—a silence that is more deafening than any public statement.

Lively, who once famously paraded Swift as the godmother to her children and used the friendship as a “badge of moral credibility,” is now allegedly left graveling for a response. This fallout is reportedly a direct result of Lively’s aggressive legal tactics. There are reports that her legal team, in their desperate pursuit of evidence, allegedly tried to subpoena Taylor Swift, attempting to drag one of the world’s most powerful celebrities into her petty drama. This overreach destroyed the trust that formed the foundation of their bond.

The message from Swift is chillingly clear: betrayal, especially for legal leverage, is unforgivable. Swift’s response wasn’t a tweet or a diss track; it was strategic indifference, appearing publicly with other close friends like Selena Gomez—a highly visible and calculated snub that leaves Lively utterly isolated.

The Debunked ‘Godmother’ Narrative

Adding to the layers of public embarrassment is the resurfacing scrutiny of the entire “Taylor-as-godmother” narrative, which is now being widely debunked. For years, Lively leaned into the story, even having her daughter’s voice featured on a Swift track. However, the timeline of events suggests a major fabrication for PR purposes.

Lively’s first daughter, James, was born in December 2014. Yet, the first public photo and confirmed meeting between Lively and Swift didn’t occur until December 2015—a full year later. This timeline makes the godmother story logistically impossible. Moreover, earlier reports had the actresses of The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants being named godmothers, a claim Lively later had to publicly backtrack on, labeling them “fairy godmothers” or a “spiritual support system.”

The godmother story, once a cornerstone of Lively’s relatable, wholesome brand, now stands exposed as a manipulative, years-long PR fantasy. It underscores a pattern where narrative construction takes precedence over fact, sacrificing personal truth for an Instagram-worthy image.

Distraction Strategy: The Boozy Pivot

In a truly tone-deaf and ironic move, as her legal case crumbled and her key friendship dissolved, Blake Lively attempted a bizarre public deflection: launching a line of ready-to-drink alcoholic beverages called Betty Booze.

The actress, who has publicly stated on multiple occasions that she does not drink alcohol, is now selling vodka iced tea. This pivot, critics argue, is a classic, desperate crisis marketing tactic—a brightly colored attempt to distract the public from the grim realities of her legal and personal implosion. The contrast between her serious claims of emotional trauma and her sudden, glossy foray into the liquor business highlights the stark disconnect between her public performance and her legal reality.

Blake Lively entered the courtroom as an A-list powerhouse with an immaculate reputation; she is walking away as a cautionary tale. Her attempt to turn a legal process into a blockbuster movie script, complete with a victim narrative and celebrity cameos, has officially failed. The judge’s refusal to play along, coupled with the silence of her former best friend, leaves her with no fall-back plan, no viable claims, and a professional reputation that has suffered catastrophic, potentially permanent, damage.