In an amended complaint, attorneys for Blake Lively added nearly 50 pages to their lawsuit against the actress’ co-star Justin Baldoni, furthering the details to Lively’s initial allegations of 𝓈ℯ𝓍ual harassment and retaliation.

Filed in New York federal court on Tuesday just ahead of a judge’s deadline, the amended complaint states that additional women who worked on the set of the movie, “It Ends With Us,” were made uncomfortable by Baldoni’s “unwelcome behavior” and confided in Lively.

Another female co-star reported concerns about Baldoni to Sony, the film’s distributor, according to Lively’s complaint.

“Ms. Lively brought this lawsuit because she was one of the ‘women or two’ that Mr. Baldoni ‘one million percent’ … ‘made uncomfortable” on the set of the film,” the amended lawsuit states. “Ms. Lively was not the only one who was uncomfortable on set, and Mr. Baldoni and Wayfarer knew it. After Mr. Baldoni learned that he had caused Ms. Lively and others to feel ‘uncomfortable,’ he turned his TED Talk and ‘feminist’ advocacy on its head.”

As mentioned in her original complaint, the amended lawsuit alleges that after Lively claims she first reported her concerns about Baldoni’s behavior in May 2023, “another female cast member reported her own concerns regarding Mr. Baldoni’s unwelcome behavior” to a representative for Sony and another one of the film’s producers.

After the Sony rep shared the concerns with Baldoni, he “responded to that female cast member in writing, acknowledging that he was aware of her concerns, and that adjustments would be made,” the complaint states.One week later, according to Lively’s suit, that same female cast member “told Ms. Lively about her growing concerns with the conditions on set and that she found it difficult to talk to Mr. Baldoni.”

Lively’s attorneys say that instead of making adjustments on-set to make the women feel more comfortable, Baldoni then retaliated against Lively by hiring a crisis management team and running a smear campaign to ruin Lively’s reputation.

“The complaint includes significant contemporaneous evidence that Ms. Lively was not alone in raising allegations of on-set misconduct more than a year before the film was edited; as well as evidence detailing the threats, harassment, and intimidation of not just Ms. Lively, but numerous innocent bystanders that have followed defendants’ retaliatory campaign,” Lively’s attorneys, Esra Hudson and Mike Gottlieb, said in a statement to CNN.

When contacted by CNN, Baldoni’s attorney described Lively’s amended complaint as “underwhelming” and “filled with unsubstantial hearsay of unnamed persons who are clearly no longer willing to come forward or publicly support her claims.”

In Tuesday’s filing, Lively’s attorneys state that they did not name some individuals in an effort to “protect innocent bystanders” from online harassment.

“These witnesses have given Ms. Lively permission to share the substance of their communications … and they will testify and produce responsive documents in the discovery process,” the complaint states.

Lively also added two new causes of action – including defamation – to her lawsuit, alleging that Baldoni’s attorney, Bryan Freedman, has made defamatory comments about Lively in the media, retaliating against her for “speaking up and bringing legal claims against Mr. Baldoni.”

Freedman “regularly issues inflammatory content to media outlets, appearing on any show that will have him,” the suit states, “and saying anything, whether true or false, that will harm Ms. Lively’s credibility and intimidate others from speaking up on her behalf.

How we got here

Lively’s amended lawsuit is the latest development on the ongoing legal saga between Lively and Baldoni, who starred opposite each other in the box office hit, “It Ends With Us,” in which they played an on-screen couple and featured instances of domestic violence.

Lively first accused Baldoni of 𝓈ℯ𝓍ual harassment and retaliation in December in a civil rights complaint, which preceded her lawsuit.

Lively alleges that after she had brought forward concerns of 𝓈ℯ𝓍ual harassment and workplace safety on the set of “It Ends With Us,” Baldoni and his team orchestrated a smear campaign behind the scenes to ruin her reputation across social media and the tabloids.

Defendants in Lively’s suit include Baldoni, his business associates, including a publicist and crisis managers, as well as his production company, Wayfarer Studios.

Baldoni has denied Lively’s allegations. In his own lawsuit, Baldoni accused Lively and her husband Ryan Reynolds of seeking to harm his reputation and take over creative control of the film.

Baldoni is suing the couple and their personal publicist, for $400 million. He is also suing the New York Times for $250 million, alleging that the newspaper worked in coordination with Lively’s team to print a one-sided narrative in their article that first unveiled Lively’s claims back in December. The NYT denies Baldoni’s claims and previously told CNN that they stand by their reporting.

On Tuesday, Lively’s attorneys told CNN that they will move to dismiss Baldoni’s “utterly meritless lawsuits” against her and Reynolds, and will “move full speed ahead with discovery that we expect will reveal shocking details about the depth to which the defendants have sunk in their unending efforts to ‘bury,’ ‘ruin,’ and ‘destroy’ Ms. Lively and her family.”

In the wake of the New York Times article and Lively’s complaint against Baldoni, he was dropped by the talent agency, WME, which also represents Lively and Reynolds. Lively also received swift support across Hollywood, including from SAG-AFTRA, the actors’ union, and Sony, the studio behind “It Ends With Us.”

Last week, the head of WME’s parent company, mega agent Ari Emanuel, said during a podcast appearance that he fired Baldoni and stood behind Lively and Reynolds.

“If what is alleged in her lawsuit that what happened on social media is true, just because she complained to the studio that things were unhealthy on the set, and that he was director and this man was the producer, and they did to her what is being alleged, they’re really bad people,” Emanuel said on the “Freakonomics” podcast. “I know Blake, I know Ryan, they’re good people.”

Baldoni’s attorney, Freedman, responded to Emanuel’s comments, saying in part: “Perhaps Ari’s perspective would be different if they had ever met in the half decade they were clients of his agency.”

Headed to trial in 2026

Rumors of the frayed relationship between the Lively and Baldoni were noted during the film’s 2024 press tour. But the escalation to a now very public legal battle is rare occurrence as celebrities often choose to settle disputes privately behind closed doors to avoid the dissection by social media spectators that has taken place since Lively’s complaint.

Last week, lawyers for Lively and Baldoni asked the judge overseeing the case to avoid mediation, indicating that a settlement is not on the table and that they intend to go to trial.

The trial has been set for March 2026.

Earlier this month, Baldoni’s attorney published a website containing legal documents pertaining to the case, making hundreds of text messages between Lively, Baldoni and Reynolds easily accessible for the public to feast on.

At a February hearing, the judge told attorneys for Lively and Baldoni to avoid making statements in public that could prejudice proceedings. The judge told lawyers that if the parties try to litigate the case in the media, he has the ability to move up the trial.

Last week, Lively’s lawyers issued subpoenas to phone carriers and internet providers to obtain phone, text and email records from Baldoni and his team from the last two years in an effort, they said, to discover the depth of the alleged smear campaign against her.

Baldoni’s attorney, Freedman, has objected to the subpoenas, calling Lively’s efforts to obtain Baldoni’s vast phone records a “massive fishing expedition.”

In a letter to the judge earlier this week, Lively’s attorneys said the records they are aiming to obtain are “tailored to key individuals and relevant time periods.”

A judge has yet to rule on the subpoenas.