Kevin O’Leary secures $2.8M as court issues default judgment

Kevin O’Leary wins $2.8M defamation judgment against Ben Armstrong

Kevin O’Leary has won a defamation case in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, with $2.8 million in damages awarded against crypto influencer Ben Armstrong. As reported by The Block, the ruling stems from March 2025 posts that falsely accused O’Leary of murder connected to a 2019 boating accident.

The judgment addresses demonstrably false allegations amplified to a large online audience. It centers on reputational and emotional harm caused by those statements.

Why the ruling matters for online speech and influencers

The case reinforces that influencers are constrained by defamation law when making factual claims about public figures. False allegations, even on fast-moving platforms, can incur substantial liability.

For public-figure plaintiffs, courts look to whether defendants acted with actual malice, meaning knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard. The ruling underscores that online virality does not dilute this standard.

It also highlights risks around coordinated harassment that can follow incendiary posts. Courts may treat doxxing and calls to action as aggravating conduct when assessing harm and punishment.

As reported by Bloomberg Law, the court entered a default judgment after Armstrong failed to substantively respond, awarding about $78,000 for reputational harm, $750,000 for mental anguish, and $2,000,000 in punitive damages. The report notes the court rejected mental-health-based excuses for nonparticipation.

The same report describes posts that shared O’Leary’s phone number and urged followers to target him, a factor relevant to punitive damages. “Call a real life murderer,” Armstrong wrote, the report notes.

Legal context and case timeline

Key events: 2019 accident context, March 2025 posts, judgment

The dispute traces to a 2019 boating accident, followed by Armstrong’s March 2025 posts accusing O’Leary of murder. The federal court then entered judgment, resolving liability and awarding damages.

Defamation standards: public-figure, actual malice, default judgment basics

In U.S. law, public figures must prove falsity, publication, harm, and actual malice. Actual malice requires knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard, not mere negligence.

Default judgment resolves liability when a defendant fails to defend after proper notice. Courts still require proof of damages and may award punitive damages for egregious conduct.

FAQ about Kevin O’Leary defamation case

How were the $2.8 million in damages calculated and what portion was punitive?

Reported damages: ~$78,000 reputational, $750,000 mental anguish, and $2,000,000 punitive, totaling $2.8 million. Punitive damages constitute the largest share.

Why was a default judgment entered and what does that mean for the case?

The court entered default after no substantive response from the defendant. Liability is established without trial, and the court determines appropriate damages from the record.