Kevin O’Leary Secures $2.8 Million Defamation Judgment Against Crypto Influencer

By Patricia Miller

Feb 14, 2026

2 min read

Kevin O’Leary won a $2.8 million judgment against Ben Armstrong for defamation linked to false allegations about a boating accident.

What was the defamation case involving Kevin O’Leary and Ben Armstrong?

The recent ruling in a Miami federal court has significant implications for both high-profile investors and the cryptocurrency community. Kevin O’Leary, a prominent entrepreneur and television investor known from Shark Tank, successfully obtained a judgment of $2.8 million against Ben Armstrong, a crypto influencer better recognized as BitBoy. The judgment stems from a defamation case where Armstrong failed to respond to the allegations made against him during the proceedings.

In this case, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida awarded O’Leary substantial financial compensation. This included $750,000 for emotional distress, $78,000 for damage to his reputation, and $2 million in punitive damages due to Armstrong's nonappearance in court. The dispute was rooted in Armstrong's social media posts from March 2025, in which he accused O’Leary of being involved in a 2019 boating accident that resulted in fatalities. O’Leary was a passenger in the incident, and his wife was later exonerated from any wrongdoing.

How did Armstrong’s actions affect O’Leary?

The posts made by Armstrong were widely viewed, garnering around 156,000 views, and they included personal details such as O’Leary’s phone number. This breach of privacy prompted O’Leary to ramp up his security spending by an estimated $200,000 annually and triggered a suspension of Armstrong's social media accounts.

The court later found that Armstrong demonstrated actual malice through his blog posts and correspondence, which included aggressive messages directed at judges involved in separate matters. Armstrong’s attempts to overturn the default judgment by claiming mental health issues and incarceration were dismissed by the court. The ruling emphasized that he had been properly notified of the lawsuit yet delayed his response by nearly a year.

In conclusion, this verdict demonstrates the serious consequences of defamation in the digital age and highlights the responsibilities that come with social media influence.

Important Notice And Disclaimer

This article does not provide any financial advice and is not a recommendation to deal in any securities or product. Investments may fall in value and an investor may lose some or all of their investment. Past performance is not an indicator of future performance.