Read Blake Lively’s five-page bragging letter about her ‘immense’ powers: 77 bullet points of pure cringe… as her own words backfire spectacularly in case against Justin Baldoni

The Daily Mail can reveal that a letter from Blake Lively on the set of 2024 film It Ends With Us detailing how much power she had has come back to haunt her in her ongoing legal battle against co-star and director Justin Baldoni.

The 38-year-old actor sent a five-page letter to the Producers Guild of America as he sought a coveted producing credit, declaring that he “produced every moment of this film” and describing his contributions in 77 bullet points, most of which begin with the word “I.”

But in a devastating ruling on her $161 million lawsuit, Judge Lewis Liman quoted Lively herself on Thursday, concluding that she had such extensive control over the film that she could not be considered an employee; This was a crucial distinction that made the laws he relied on unenforceable and led to the dismissal of 10 of the 13 claims he filed against Baldoni and the film’s producers.

Lively described the tribute as “the greatest honor in film” in her June 2024 letter. He name-dropped his ‘friend’ Bradley Cooper and talked about the ‘tremendous work’ he did on the film.

But Judge Liman said he ‘not only reserved significant contractual control over his participation in the film, but also exercised that control’.

The film follows florist Lily Bloom, played by Lively, as she falls in love with a charming but abusive neurosurgeon played by Baldoni, who is also the film’s director.

This meant he could not move forward with his claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the California Labor Code; because they applied only to personnel, not independent contractors.

The trial is expected to continue May 18, but the trial will only cover three counts: retaliation, aiding and abetting retaliation, and breach of an agreement known as the Covenant Rider.

But on Monday afternoon, lawyers for both sides were summoned to discuss their current positions.

Assuming the case reaches a jury, it will focus more on the online ‘smear campaign’ that Baldoni’s PR team allegedly implemented during the film’s release.

Judge Liman’s decision delved into New York and California contracts and employment law, alleging that Lively suffered $161 million in damages after being sexually harassed and then retaliated against.

The key was whether Lively was an independent contractor or an employee: Judge Liman found that she was a contractor.

Lively’s five-page letter to the Producers Guild outlining her influence — seen in part here — was central to the judge’s decision

He vividly laid out his contributions in 77 bullet points, most of which began with the word ‘I’.

He decided that this was because he had much more power and control than a normal staff member would have.

Lively’s request for a PGA loan appears to stem from her interest in getting behind the camera, and a loan or ‘tag’ from the PGA would have been crucial in helping her with this.

PGA credits give the actor credibility and often allow them to be considered for awards in the films they worked on.

Scarlett Johansson was deemed worthy of the award for her 2024 film Fly Me To The Moon, in which she starred and produced.

In his decision, Judge Liman cited 22 points from Lively’s letter to the PGA, including that she “led a relocation” from Boston to New York and “reviewed hundreds of casting tapes” to find the actress who played the younger version of her character, Lily Bloom.

Justin Baldoni welcomes verdict after judge dismisses all sexual harassment allegations against him

He described how he held frequent Zoom calls with the cast and crew, laid off a senior member of the film crew, monitored monitors between takes, worked with his own editors, chose 90 percent of the music, and spearheaded the film’s marketing.

He briskly pleaded with the PGA, saying his “work off camera has meant more to me than anything I’ve done in my 20-year career.”

He also acknowledged how unusual it was for the PGA to consider an application like his: Normally, the guild does its own analysis to decide whether to grant a loan.

Lively said the film “took every part of me, practically, logistically, creatively and emotionally.”

“Thank you for considering this,” he added. ‘I also know and appreciate that this grade grant did not fall that way.’

Judge Liman said in his ruling that Lively’s ‘role was far superior to that of a traditional employee’.

He said: ‘He enjoyed the economic independence of being able to walk at any time, with the only consequence being that he was potentially in breach of contract.

‘And he used that independence to negotiate the terms under which he would return to work. He also enjoyed equity in the film, ensuring that his compensation was based not just on his own work but on the success of the film as a whole.

According to the referee, the ‘undisputed facts’ showed that Lively was not part of the squad.

He said: ‘While each factor may not weigh equally in favor of this conclusion when viewed in isolation, analyzing the factors collectively eliminates any real disagreement.’

Lively’s efforts to exert more control in the judge’s decision also bit her in another area: She did not sign the Actor’s Loan Agreement, or ALA, which governs sexual harassment on set.

Baldoni’s lawyers sent a copy of the ALA to Lively’s team in May 2023, but it had not yet been signed when filming began a few weeks later.

The judge said many of the incidents Lively mentioned ‘would not support a claim of a hostile work environment or would support it at most minimally or in context’.

It wasn’t signed until February 2024, when filming finally wrapped: The judge noted that Lively’s lawyers instead sent it back with changes to 20 percent of its terms.

These included changes to the sexual harassment policy and privacy, all of which were ‘strongly rejected’ by Baldoni’s legal team.

By June 2024, an exasperated Baldoni, 42, sent a message saying Lively would ‘not sign her contract’ – and she never did.

Despite this, Lively tried to sue, citing the ALA, but the judge rejected it, saying it was not enforceable because Lively had not signed it.

Judge Liman, whose younger brother Doug has directed such films as The Bourne Identity, Swingers and Mr & Mrs Smith, wrote: ‘Ultimately, Lively fails to confront the fundamental dilemma of her claim.

‘He claims that the ALA became binding on him (Baldoni and the producers) while the parties were still negotiating, but he cannot pinpoint exactly when the parties became bound by the ALA or which version of the ALA they were bound by.

A judge ruled that Lively, who is married to Ryan Reynolds, was an independent contractor and not an employee on the film set; This was a decisive distinction

‘Neither party is bound unless both parties are bound.

Which sketch of ‘ALA’ is linked to Lively? Was this the version without the sexual harassment provision?’

Speaking after the decision, Sigrid McCawley, one of Lively’s lawyers, said that they would continue the hearing regardless of the judge’s decision.

He said the case was always about devastating retaliation and the extraordinary steps the defendants took to ‘destroy Blake Lively’s reputation for advocating for safety on set.’

McCawley said: ‘The greatest measure of justice for Blake Lively is that the people and tactics behind these coordinated digital attacks are exposed and are already held accountable by the other women they targeted.’

Baldoni’s lawyers, Alexandra Shapiro and Jonathan Bach, said in their statement that they were “very pleased” that all sexual harassment allegations were dismissed.

They said: ‘These were very serious allegations and we are grateful to the court for its careful consideration of the facts, the law and the wealth of evidence presented.

‘What remains is a significantly narrowed case and we look forward to presenting our defense against the remaining claims in court.’

The future of the case is uncertain. Lively’s attorneys were ordered to call U.S. Magistrate Judge Sarah Cave at 3 p.m. Monday ‘to discuss their client’s updated settlement position,’ according to a scheduling order issued Friday by the Manhattan District Court.

Lawyers for Baldoni and his company, Wayfarer Productions, were told to call in an hour.

But this does not mean that everything is over. Another Lively attorney, Michael Gottlieb, said the actress is looking forward to the hearing.

Gottlieb said in a statement that the jury would still hear allegations of sexual harassment, which he called the “beating heart” of the case.

“The court’s decision that Ms. Lively’s state and federal harassment claims could not go to trial was about legal issues rather than an endorsement of defendants’ conduct,” Gottlieb said.

‘The court ruled that Ms. Lively’s sexual harassment claims could not go to a jury because Ms. Lively did not sign a contract, was an independent contractor rather than an employee, and the offensive behavior occurred in New Jersey rather than California.’