TLDR Kevin O’Leary won a $2.8 million defamation judgment against crypto creator Ben Armstrong (BitBoy) in a Miami federal court Armstrong made false posts in MarchTLDR Kevin O’Leary won a $2.8 million defamation judgment against crypto creator Ben Armstrong (BitBoy) in a Miami federal court Armstrong made false posts in March

BitBoy Crypto Ben Armstrong Must Pay Kevin O’Leary $2.8M for False Murder Claims

2026/02/14 20:40
4 min read
For feedback or concerns regarding this content, please contact us at crypto.news@mexc.com

TLDR

  • Kevin O’Leary won a $2.8 million defamation judgment against crypto creator Ben Armstrong (BitBoy) in a Miami federal court
  • Armstrong made false posts in March 2025 claiming O’Leary was involved in a fatal 2019 boating accident where O’Leary was only a passenger
  • The court awarded O’Leary $750,000 for emotional distress, $78,000 for reputation harm, and $2 million in punitive damages
  • Armstrong’s posts included O’Leary’s phone number and got 156,000 views, forcing O’Leary to increase security spending by $200,000 annually
  • Armstrong failed to appear in court and his request to overturn the default judgment was rejected despite citing mental health issues

Kevin O’Leary secured a $2.8 million court judgment against crypto content creator Ben Armstrong this week. Armstrong operated under the online name BitBoy Crypto before the legal action.

The US District Court for the Southern District of Florida ruled in O’Leary’s favor after Armstrong failed to respond to the lawsuit. Judge Beth Bloom awarded the damages in a Miami federal court proceeding.

O’Leary received $750,000 for emotional distress in the judgment. The court also awarded him $78,000 for damage to his reputation.

The ruling included $2 million in punitive damages. These damages were meant to punish Armstrong for his conduct.

The case started after Armstrong made posts on social media in March 2025. He accused O’Leary of involvement in a fatal boating accident from 2019.

O’Leary was a passenger in the 2019 incident. His wife Linda O’Leary was operating the boat at the time.

Linda O’Leary faced charges of careless operation of a vehicle. She went through a 13-day trial for the charges.

The court found the other vessel had been operating without lights on. Linda O’Leary was cleared of all wrongdoing after the trial.

False Claims Spread on Social Media

Armstrong’s posts drew approximately 156,000 views on the platform. The posts called O’Leary a murderer in the content.

The posts included O’Leary’s personal phone number. Armstrong encouraged his followers to contact O’Leary directly.

The disclosure of the phone number led to a suspension on the social platform. O’Leary had to increase his annual security spending as a result.

The security costs went up by an estimated $200,000 per year. This expense was directly tied to the harassment from Armstrong’s posts.

Court Rejects Armstrong’s Appeal

The court found that Armstrong acted with actual malice in making the posts. Judge Bloom noted Armstrong had a pattern of hostile communications.

Armstrong sent messages to judges in other separate legal proceedings. This behavior supported the finding of malicious intent.

Armstrong tried to have the default judgment overturned after it was issued. He cited his incarceration as a reason for not responding.

Armstrong also mentioned mental health conditions including bipolar disorder. He argued these factors prevented him from defending himself.

The court rejected Armstrong’s request to set aside the judgment. Judge Bloom noted Armstrong had proper notice of the lawsuit.

Armstrong had been properly served with the legal documents. He waited nearly a year before attempting to challenge the default judgment.

The court found that reversing the judgment would unfairly harm O’Leary. O’Leary had already prepared motions and expert reports for the case.

O’Leary attended a full evidentiary hearing in the matter. The court determined Armstrong’s delay was unreasonable given these circumstances.

O’Leary is known for his role on the television show Shark Tank. He also appears as a business commentator on major American television networks.

O’Leary has 11.1 million followers across his social media platforms. He founded The Learning Company and sold it to Mattel in the early 2000s.

The post BitBoy Crypto Ben Armstrong Must Pay Kevin O’Leary $2.8M for False Murder Claims appeared first on CoinCentral.

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact crypto.news@mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

The post Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The cryptocurrency world is buzzing with a recent controversy surrounding a bold OpenVPP partnership claim. This week, OpenVPP (OVPP) announced what it presented as a significant collaboration with the U.S. government in the innovative field of energy tokenization. However, this claim quickly drew the sharp eye of on-chain analyst ZachXBT, who highlighted a swift and official rebuttal that has sent ripples through the digital asset community. What Sparked the OpenVPP Partnership Claim Controversy? The core of the issue revolves around OpenVPP’s assertion of a U.S. government partnership. This kind of collaboration would typically be a monumental endorsement for any private cryptocurrency project, especially given the current regulatory climate. Such a partnership could signify a new era of mainstream adoption and legitimacy for energy tokenization initiatives. OpenVPP initially claimed cooperation with the U.S. government. This alleged partnership was said to be in the domain of energy tokenization. The announcement generated considerable interest and discussion online. ZachXBT, known for his diligent on-chain investigations, was quick to flag the development. He brought attention to the fact that U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Commissioner Hester Peirce had directly addressed the OpenVPP partnership claim. Her response, delivered within hours, was unequivocal and starkly contradicted OpenVPP’s narrative. How Did Regulatory Authorities Respond to the OpenVPP Partnership Claim? Commissioner Hester Peirce’s statement was a crucial turning point in this unfolding story. She clearly stated that the SEC, as an agency, does not engage in partnerships with private cryptocurrency projects. This response effectively dismantled the credibility of OpenVPP’s initial announcement regarding their supposed government collaboration. Peirce’s swift clarification underscores a fundamental principle of regulatory bodies: maintaining impartiality and avoiding endorsements of private entities. Her statement serves as a vital reminder to the crypto community about the official stance of government agencies concerning private ventures. Moreover, ZachXBT’s analysis…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:13
South Korea Orders Crypto Custody Overhaul After Police Lose Seized BTC

South Korea Orders Crypto Custody Overhaul After Police Lose Seized BTC

TLDR South Korea introduced new custody rules after police lost seized Bitcoin worth $1.4 million. The Finance Minister confirmed a full inspection of digital asset
Share
Coincentral2026/03/03 01:00
Trump Justice Department’s motion to take Michigan voter rolls misspelled 'United States'

Trump Justice Department’s motion to take Michigan voter rolls misspelled 'United States'

The Justice Department filed an emergency motion at the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday against the state of Michigan over its refusal to share voter rolls
Share
Alternet2026/03/03 01:25