- Court awards $2.8M after finding actual malice in Armstrong’s posts about 2019 boating accident.
- Default judgment stands as court rejects claims of incarceration and mental health delays.
- Disclosure of O’Leary’s phone number led to suspension and higher security costs.
A federal court in Florida has entered a $2.8 million defamation judgment in favor of investor and television personality Kevin O’Leary against crypto influencer Ben Armstrong, concluding a case tied to social media posts about a 2019 boating accident. The ruling, issued by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida in Miami, followed Armstrong’s failure to respond to the lawsuit or appear in court.
According to the court’s order, Judge Beth Bloom granted O’Leary $750,000 for emotional distress, approximately $78,000 for reputational harm, and $2 million in punitive damages. The total award reached $2.8 million.
The court ruled that Armstrong acted with actual malice in publishing statements that accused O’Leary of involvement in a fatal boating accident. O’Leary had been a passenger in the 2019 incident. His wife, Linda O’Leary, was charged with careless operation of a vehicle but was later exonerated following a trial. Kevin O’Leary was never charged.
Armstrong’s March 2025 posts drew roughly 156,000 views and included O’Leary’s personal phone number. The posts encouraged followers to contact him directly. The disclosure led to a suspension on the social platform and prompted O’Leary to increase his annual security spending by an estimated $200,000.
In her ruling, Bloom cited Armstrong’s pattern of hostile communications, including messages sent to judges in separate proceedings. The court also referenced the personal and professional impact of the posts, noting that O’Leary received inquiries from business partners concerning the allegations.
Bid to Overturn Judgment Rejected
Armstrong later sought to set aside the default judgment, stating that incarceration and mental health conditions, including bipolar disorder, prevented him from responding in time. The court rejected that request.
Bloom found that Armstrong had actual notice of the lawsuit and had been properly served. Despite that, he waited nearly a year before taking action. The court concluded that vacating the judgment would prejudice O’Leary, who had already prepared motions and expert reports and attended a full evidentiary hearing.
The judge stated that the posts reopened emotional distress related to the 2019 accident. O’Leary’s family believed they had moved past the incident, but the renewed allegations revived attention to the case.
Related: Kevin O’Leary Sells 27 Crypto Positions, Bets Only on Bitcoin and Ethereum
Disclaimer: The information presented in this article is for informational and educational purposes only. The article does not constitute financial advice or advice of any kind. Coin Edition is not responsible for any losses incurred as a result of the utilization of content, products, or services mentioned. Readers are advised to exercise caution before taking any action related to the company.
