Heath Ritenour, John Ritenour and Insurance Office of America Face Accusations of Weaponizing “Fraudulent Lawsuit” for “Malicious” Purposes in Recently Filed Objection – Information as to Reputations Sought

September 11, 2023, ORLANDO, FLORIDA.  On September 1, 2023, Plaintiffs Heath Ritenour (“Heath”), John Ritenour (“John”) and Insurance Office of America, Inc. (“IOA”) filed a Notice of Production from Non-Parties in a case they filed in Seminole County, Florida in March 2020 (“2020 Case”). This Notice is governed by the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure which permit an objection by a party within 10 or 15 days depending on service.  On September 11, 2023 (“September 11 Objection”), Spagnuolo filed a timely Objection, and the following is an announcement of some of the allegations and arguments therein.  This Objection has not been ruled upon or heard at a public hearing as of the time of this announcement and the Court may overrule Spagnuolo’s Objection. 

The September 11 Objection states in relevant parts that Heath, John and IOA have taken inconsistent and adverse legal positions to prosecute the 2020 Case against Spagnuolo which form part of his objections to newly filed discovery.  

Quoting directly from Spagnuolo’s Objection: “More specifically, on June 15, 2020, [the trial court] heard …Plaintiffs’ Amended Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Discovery and for a Protective Order (“Plaintiffs’ Motion for Protective Order”) which was filed on June 3, 2020.”  

“In said Motion, Plaintiffs, facing a plethora of discovery requests from Defendants, argued that…[the trial court] should enter a protective order blocking noticed depositions of non-parties.   Indeed, … not to actually litigate the merits of this case, which would involve establishing in a court of law that Heath Ritenour has or had an impeccable reputation, and that Heath, his father, John Ritenour and Insurance Office of American were innocent of civil claims damages related to illegal schemes which were accomplished through mail and wire fraud in violation of Civil Racketeering statutes.”

“In …their Amended Motion for Protective Order filed June 3, 2020, Plaintiffs specifically argued that this Court should deny thirty party discovery on the basis that the pleadings were far from being closed and that allowing duplicative and piecemeal discovery would burden resources.  On June 15, 2020, [the trial court] entered its Order Granting Plaintiffs’ Amended Motion for… Protective Order.  In the Order, this Court ruled that “…the Depositions (as defined in the Motion) and the…related subpoenas are quashed.”  Hence, Plaintiffs’ arguments to delay third party and duplicative discovery were successful. 

“Fast forward to September 1, 2023 – Plaintiffs [filed a Notice of Production to Third Parties] but as ….of September 1, 2023,… the chronology of this case is clear “the pleadings are far from closed…” as Plaintiffs stated back on June 3, 2020.” 

Spagnuolo’s Objection argues: “Why would then “what’s good for the goose not be good for the gander” in that third party discovery be denied until the pleadings are closed?    What’s changed?   Nothing, except… Heath, John and IOA now endeavor to subpoena third parties because it presently suits their malicious, selfish interests – to endeavor to harass, intimidate and …interfere with Spagnuolo’s rights under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and the doctrine of litigation privilege by targeting businesses with publication capabilities.”   

The Objection further states: “And now that there have been public announcements which Plaintiffs have attached to the subpoenas related to the Notice of Production, Heath, John and IOA’s have postured to weaponize this fraudulent lawsuit for malicious and perverted purposes by targeting third parties who issue press releases and announcements seeking information or witnesses as an alternative means to interfere with litigation investigations and the First Amendment of the Constitution.”

If you have any information relative to any of the above allegations in the 2020 Case pending in Seminole County, Florida against Spagnuolo, or as to the character and reputations of John Ritenour, Heath Ritenour or Insurance Office of America, please contact us at info@farrowlawfirm.com.  You may also contact us at 954-252-9818 and are under no obligation to provide your name or contact information on a confidential basis.   All communications will remain confidential unless otherwise permitted by federal or state law, rules of procedure, evidence or Court order.     

 ***THIS IS NOT A LAWYER ADVERTISEMENT OR SOLICITATION*** 

This Announcement is for informational gathering purposes and otherwise to report on the status of the lawsuit and is not a solicitation for any individual having any alleged claims against any of the Defendants named above and, should we receive a request for representation to prosecute or defend claims as to these Defendants, Farrow Law will decline the same and the same applies to anyone seeking representation by the firm based upon this release.  This case has not gone to trial, nor have any of the allegations or arguments made in the recent filing herein above been established as evidence in a court of law or otherwise as to any party.