MyPillow CEO Ordered to Pay Millions: Understanding Defamation Damages in Your Case

On June 16, 2025, a federal jury in Colorado ordered MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell to pay $2.3 million in damages to Eric Coomer, a former Dominion Voting Systems executive, in a defamation case. This high-profile case highlights the serious consequences of making false and damaging statements about others, and it raises important questions about defamation law and the types of damages that can be awarded.

What is Defamation?

Defamation is a legal term that refers to a false statement that harms someone’s reputation. It’s an attack on a person’s good name, and it can have devastating consequences for their personal and professional life. Defamation can take two forms:

Libel: Written or published defamatory statements (e.g., in a newspaper, magazine, book, or online).
Slander: Spoken defamatory statements.

To prove defamation, a plaintiff generally must show the following:[1, 2, 10]

A false statement purporting to be fact: The statement must be false and presented as a fact, not an opinion.
Publication or communication to a third party: The statement must be communicated to someone other than the person being defamed.
Fault amounting to at least negligence: The person making the statement must have been negligent in not verifying the truth of the statement.
Damages, or some harm caused to the reputation: The statement must have caused harm to the reputation of the person being defamed.

The MyPillow CEO Case: A Closer Look

In the case of Coomer v. Lindell, Eric Coomer sued Mike Lindell for defamation, alleging that Lindell made false and damaging statements about him in connection with the 2020 presidential election. Coomer claimed that Lindell’s statements, which accused Coomer of rigging the election, led to death threats and forced him to leave his job. [7]

The jury found Lindell liable for defamation and awarded Coomer $2.3 million in damages. While Coomer’s legal team asked the jury to award $40 million in punitive damages against Lindell and his companies, in total, Coomer came away with a fraction of what he asked for, about $2.3 million as opposed to $62.7 million. Only $300,000 of that is in punitive damages, which are meant to punish a defendant and serve as an example to others. [5]

Understanding Defamation Damages

When someone is defamed, they may be entitled to damages to compensate them for the harm they have suffered. There are several types of defamation damages, including:[12]

Actual Damages: These are compensatory damages designed to compensate the plaintiff for the actual losses they have suffered as a result of the defamation. This can include lost income, lost business opportunities, and medical expenses.
Reputational Damages: These damages compensate the plaintiff for the harm to their reputation caused by the defamation. These damages can be difficult to quantify, but they can be significant, especially if the plaintiff has a strong reputation in their community or profession. If a statement is considered defamatory per se, reputational damages are presumed to have occurred. [2]
Emotional Distress Damages: These damages compensate the plaintiff for the emotional distress they have suffered as a result of the defamation, such as anxiety, depression, and humiliation.
Punitive Damages: These damages are intended to punish the defendant for their conduct and to deter others from engaging in similar conduct. Punitive damages are typically awarded only in cases where the defendant’s conduct was particularly egregious or malicious.

In the Coomer v. Lindell case, the jury awarded Coomer $440,500 in combined economic and non-economic damages from Lindell, and $1,865,500 in combined economic, non-economic, and punitive damages from Lindell’s company FrankSpeech. [5]

Factors Affecting Defamation Damages

Several factors can affect the amount of damages awarded in a defamation case, including:[9, 20]

The severity of the defamatory statement: The more damaging the statement, the higher the damages are likely to be.
The extent of publication: The more widely the statement was published, the higher the damages are likely to be.
The plaintiff’s reputation: A plaintiff with a strong reputation is likely to be awarded more damages than a plaintiff with a poor reputation.
The defendant’s conduct: If the defendant acted maliciously or recklessly, the plaintiff is more likely to be awarded punitive damages.

Defenses to Defamation Claims

Even if someone makes a false and damaging statement about another person, they may have a valid defense to a defamation claim. Common defenses to defamation claims include:[1, 9]

Truth: A true statement, even if damaging, is not defamatory.
Privilege: In some situations, people have a privilege to make statements that would otherwise be defamatory. For example, statements made in court proceedings are generally privileged.
Opinion: Statements of opinion, as opposed to statements of fact, are generally not defamatory.
Fair comment: This defense protects statements made about matters of public interest, as long as the statements are made honestly and without malice.

The “Actual Malice” Standard

In cases involving public figures or matters of public concern, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant acted with “actual malice.” [1] This means that the defendant knew the statement was false or acted with reckless disregard for whether it was true or false. The “actual malice” standard is a high bar to meet, and it is designed to protect freedom of speech and the press.

Defamation and the First Amendment

Defamation law is complex because it must balance the need to protect individuals from reputational harm with the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech. The First Amendment protects even speech that is offensive or unpopular, but it does not protect false statements of fact that harm others’ reputations. The courts have struggled to strike the right balance between these competing interests, and defamation law continues to evolve.

Advice

If you believe you have been defamed, it is important to seek legal advice as soon as possible. A defamation attorney can help you assess the strength of your claim and advise you on the best course of action. They can help you gather evidence, negotiate with the other party, and, if necessary, file a lawsuit.

Conclusion

The Coomer v. Lindell case is a reminder of the serious consequences of making false and damaging statements about others. If you have been defamed, you may be entitled to damages to compensate you for the harm you have suffered. An attorney can help you understand your rights and options.