Milagro Gramz Ordered to Pay $75K Judgment in Megan Thee Stallion Case

Megan Thee Stallion should soon be receiving the $75,000 judgment ordered against MIlagro Gramz for defamation, despite the vlogger’s attempts to delay payment.

In a decision issued by Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga on Monday (June 29) and reviewed by Complex, Gramz, real name Milagro Elizabeth Cooper, was denied her request to hold off on enforcing the judgment until after her appeal.

Last year, the vlogger was found to be liable for teaming up with Tory Lanez to defame and inflict emotional distress on the three-time Grammy winner. Among other things, Gramz encouraged her followers to view a sexually explicit deepfake video of the rapper. Megan was awarded $75,000 in damages.

Earlier this month, Gramz had claimed that paying the money now (or, alternately, paying the full amount as a bond while her appeal plays out) would be a hindrance on her financial security. In court filings, she said that she is self-employed and that her income “fluctuate[s] from month to month.”

COMPLEX SHOP: Shop the brands you love, anytime and anywhere. Uncover what’s next. Buy. Collect. Obsess.

“I do not possess substantial liquid assets and do not have the financial resources necessary to immediately satisfy the judgment,” she wrote.

In addition, she argued that her appeal has a good shot at success, since it raises “serious legal questions.”

The judge disagreed on both counts. She said that “the Court has no reliable basis to evaluate Defendant’s finances,” and that there was no evidence that any creditors Gramz owes money to “would be placed in undue jeopardy” by her paying the $75K now.

As for the appeal, Judge Altonaga said that Gramz “fails to show any likelihood of success.”

“She merely argues that her appeal concerns ‘significant issues . . . regarding post-trial rulings, the reinstatement of the defamation verdict, and other issues,’ without explaining why those matters are likely to resolve in her favor,” the judge continued. “Even if the Court considered those arguments, Defendant offers merely generalized disagreement with the jury’s verdict and the Court’s post-trial rulings — which is not a showing that she is likely to succeed on appeal.”

Complex reached out to Gramz for comment about the decision, but she did not immediately respond.

Gramz had asked for the judgment to be paused earlier this month in a stay request as she took the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Describing herself as a “self-employed media commentator, researcher and content creator,” Gramz stated that she doesn’t have the “financial resources necessary to immediately satisfy the judgment or post a full supersedeas bond.”

Less than two weeks later, the legal team representing the Houston rapper insisted that Gramz’s motion “be denied in its entirety.”

They described Gramz as someone “who showed no hesitation when she broadcast that Plaintiff was a liar, directed her audience to a deep-fake pornographic video of Plaintiff, and threatened to run Plaintiff over with a car, now pleads for the Court’s solicitude so that she may avoid the consequences of a jury’s verdict and this Court’s judgment.”