Man Ordered to Pay Kim Kardashian Over $165,000 After Photo Mix-Up Lawsuit Fails

A simple photo mix up online has turned into a costly legal lesson after a judge ordered a man who sued Kim Kardashian to pay more than $165,000 in attorneys’ fees following the dismissal of his case, according to a report by My News LA.

The dispute began after Ivan Cantu alleged that his image was mistakenly used in online commentary connected to an inmate with the same name on Texas death row in early 2024. He filed suit in February 2025, bringing claims that included defamation, false light invasion of privacy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligence. He later amended the complaint to include misappropriation of likeness.

The case was ultimately dismissed after Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael C. Small granted Kardashian’s anti SLAPP motion. The anti SLAPP law in California is designed to protect speech on matters of public interest and prevent lawsuits that could discourage First Amendment expression.

Following the dismissal, Kardashian sought legal fees and costs totaling more than $186,000. The court awarded $167,475 in attorneys’ fees and $1,062 in costs, though it reduced the requested amount after finding parts of the billing excessive, including more than $57,000 linked to preparing the fees motion.

In his ruling, Judge Small acknowledged the financial gap between the parties but said it did not affect the legal outcome. The judge also pointed to Kardashian’s public profile as an internationally known celebrity and her work in criminal justice reform, including advocacy related to wrongful convictions and death penalty cases, as part of the broader context of the dispute.

Cantu’s legal team argued that the anti SLAPP statute was not intended to punish individuals who suffer harm from admitted errors. They also raised concerns about fairness given the financial imbalance between the parties and asked the court to cap any fees at $5,000. The court did not adopt that request.

In his earlier dismissal order, Judge Small said Cantu failed to provide sufficient evidence that he suffered measurable harm directly caused by the post. While Cantu submitted a declaration describing emotional distress, embarrassment, and reputational damage, the court found the claims did not meet the required threshold for damages in this context.

Cantu stated that the incident led to unwanted online messages from people who believed he was the inmate facing execution, and described anxiety and loss of sleep as a result of the confusion.

The case highlights how mistaken identity involving online content can escalate into extended legal disputes under California’s anti SLAPP framework, especially when public figures are involved. It also raises questions about how courts weigh emotional harm claims tied to digital errors and viral misinformation.

As similar cases involving image misuse and online identity confusion continue to surface, how should the law balance free expression protections with the real personal impact of mistaken identity online?

[Photo via Wikimedia Commons]

---