Ryan Reynolds Seeks Dismissal of Lawsuit Over ‘Hurt Feelings’ Claims

New York, NY – Actor Ryan Reynolds filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit against him and his wife Blake Lively, initiated by Justin Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on Tuesday. The lawsuit accuses Reynolds of mocking Baldoni through a fictional character in the film “Deadpool vs. Wolverine.” Reynolds’ legal team argues that Baldoni’s claims are rooted solely in “hurt feelings,” lacking any substantial legal standing.

The motion, obtained by TheWrap, critically assesses Baldoni’s complaints, describing the actor’s reaction as “thin-skinned outrage.” It specifically refers to the character of Nicepool, a satirical representation which Baldoni contends caricatures his “woke feminist” persona. The dismissal request states that Baldoni’s allegations do not connect to any demonstrable legal claims, emphasizing that they stem from a desire to perpetuate a victimized image.

“The emotions expressed are not supported by any actual legal framework,” read the motion. “Instead, it aligns with a general assertion of ‘hurt feelings,’ which appears to be a strategic move to enhance the narrative surrounding the retaliation campaign initiated by the Wayfarer parties against Ms. Lively.”

Baldoni, known for his role in the film “It Ends With Us,” directed by himself and co-starring Lively, claims that after the film’s successful release and amidst public backlash, he faced harassment from Reynolds and Lively, including unfounded allegations of sexual misconduct.

According to court documents, the legal battle took a more contentious turn when Baldoni indicated that he was victimized after he accused Lively of harassment and asserted that negative stories regarding him were being circulated by her publicists. Baldoni’s countersuit alleges that Lively and Reynolds conspired to damage his career through false allegations.

Reynolds’ motion to dismiss underscores the complexities surrounding the case and the intertwined personal and public ramifications of the personalities involved. In seeking dismissal, his representatives argue that the legal claims should not be actionable due to their foundational premise. Legal experts indicate that the outcome could impact how satire and artistic expression intersect with litigation.

The case continues to attract public interest not only for its star-studded parties but also for the implications it may have on entertainment law. As both sides brace for what could be a lengthy legal confrontation, outside observers are closely monitoring developments.