North Carolina Jury Orders Influencer Brenay Kennard to Pay $1.75 Million in Alienation of Affection Lawsuit

A North Carolina jury has ordered social media influencer Brenay Kennard to pay $1.75 million to a Durham woman who accused her of breaking up her marriage through an affair with her husband.

The verdict, reached this week in Durham County Court, found Kennard liable for alienation of affection and criminal conversation, two long-recognized civil claims that allow a spouse to seek damages from a third party accused of interfering in a marriage. The case was brought by Akira Montague, who said Kennard had a romantic relationship with her husband, Tim Montague, who also worked as Kennard’s manager.

According to court filings, Akira and Tim Montague were married in October 2018 and had children together. The complaint stated that Kennard and Tim Montague became romantically involved both at his home and on her social media platforms, where she has nearly three million followers on TikTok and more than 270,000 on Instagram. Akira Montague claimed the involvement caused her emotional distress, health problems, and the loss of a stable family life.

Jurors reached their decision after deliberating on Monday afternoon, awarding $1.75 million in damages. Observers described emotional reactions in the courtroom after the verdict was read.

The case drew attention not only for its outcome but for the rare laws it invoked. North Carolina’s alienation of affection law allows a husband or wife to take legal action against someone they believe intentionally damaged their marriage. The related claim, called criminal conversation, applies when a spouse proves that a third party engaged in sexual relations with their husband or wife during the marriage.

In this case, Akira Montague said Kennard’s relationship with her husband caused the loss of affection and trust in their marriage and led to its collapse. The jury agreed, finding Kennard responsible for the harm and awarding compensation for the emotional and personal damage described during the trial.

Most states have eliminated these types of lawsuits, calling them outdated. North Carolina continues to allow them under long-standing state statutes that view marriage as a protected relationship capable of legal injury. Supporters say such rulings, like the one in Montague’s case, show that intentional actions that destroy a marriage can still carry legal consequences.

The state has a long history of multimillion-dollar verdicts in alienation of affection cases. In 2011, a Wake County jury awarded $30 million to a woman who sued her husband’s alleged mistress, marking one of the largest awards of its kind in North Carolina. In 2018, Philadelphia Eagles player Fletcher Cox was sued by a North Carolina man who accused him of having an affair with his wife; that case ended in an undisclosed settlement. And in 2021, former state senator Rick Gunn reportedly paid $3 million to resolve a similar claim filed by a man who alleged Gunn had a relationship with his wife, who was then his legislative assistant.

Legal scholars note that these cases, while rare, continue to attract public attention because they test the boundary between personal relationships and civil liability. Under North Carolina law, a person bringing an alienation of affection claim must show that love and affection existed in the marriage, that it was destroyed, and that the defendant’s actions contributed to its breakdown. Juries may then award compensatory or punitive damages depending on the evidence presented.

Court records show that Tim Montague eventually left his wife for Kennard. During the trial, Akira Montague’s legal team argued that the affair not only ended the marriage but also caused lasting harm to her well-being and her children’s family structure. Kennard, whose online following has made her a prominent figure in lifestyle and beauty content, has not publicly commented on the verdict.

The verdict adds to a long list of high-profile North Carolina cases that have kept alienation of affection laws in public view. While critics continue to question whether such claims belong in modern courts, the Montague decision shows that juries in the state remain willing to hold individuals financially accountable for interfering in a marriage.