?? Insurance Office of America & Heath Ritenour Attempting To “Silence The Lambs” In Retaliatory Lawsuits Against Victims (Lambs)??

Heath Ritenour, John Ritenour and Insurance Office?of America’s?Facing Dismissal of Their Retaliatory “Countersuit” in Motion?Citing Abuses ofWealth, Power and Influence?to?Interfere with?First Amendment Freedom?Of Speech??

On November 1, 2023, named Defendants Attorney Jay Lewis Farrow and his law firm, Farrow Law Firm, filed a Motion against Heath Ritenour, John Ritenour and Insurance office of America?which seeks a dismissal with prejudice pursuant to Florida?Law?essentially?prohibiting?the filing of?a?separate?countersuit designed?for retaliatory purposes and?has no independent merit?known as “Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation” or “SLAPP Suits”. ? As alleged in the November 1,?2023?Motion,?IOA, Heath and John Ritenour filed a SLAPP lawsuit nearly three and a half years ago in?retaliation?for Farrow and Farrow Law Firm exercising their rights to freedom of speech in connection with lawsuits they were prosecuting against Insurance Office of America, Heath Ritenour and John Ritenour. ? ?

The November 1,?2023?filed under Florida’s Anit-SLAPP Statute, begins with an “Opening Statement – A Prelude to the Restoration of Justice” which states?Farrow and Farrow Law’s opinion, legal theories and hyperbole as to?what they believe has transpired in IOA’s?retaliatory?countersuit proceedings pending in Seminole County, Florida. ??The “Opening Statement” states in relevant?part:?

In the film, Silence of the Lambs (the only motion picture of its category to be nominated for and win an Academy Award for Best Picture), the heroin, “Clarise”, is an aspiring FBI Special Agent who continues to be traumatized by childhood events where she lived on a ranch hearing vulnerable lambs crying as they were led to their demise. ?While her nights were haunted by the noise, she was more troubled by the fact that there was nothing she could do to help these vulnerable creatures. ?Eventually, she tries to save just one of them, but is soon caught and?returned back?to the ranch and thereafter sent away to live as an orphan. ?

Her memories, however, became the window of a trauma pattern that was replayed in her nightly dreams. ? This impulse of valor to preserve and protect the innocent and most vulnerable amongst has driven many children who grew up being bullied because they were “different” or “smaller” or “poorer” to take up the charge to support others to find their true voice and stand for themselves against the proverbial wolves. ? That life – comes at a cost, but also with unquantifiable rewards. ?And for those who truly choose a life to offer a hand-up, rarely can circumstances cause serious doubt as blissfully sitting in the bleachers of life. ?

A lawyer and a law firm can, with steadfast Constitutional headwinds, choose to support those?whom?have lost their voice through the intimidation and bullying of those with more money, more power and an inherent characteristic that puts them first – no matter what. ?In the service of representing an individual, or in this case, individuals, the lawyer may be the only one standing between obtaining redress for harm caused by the bully?whom?would otherwise sentence the proverbial lamb to a life of quiet suffering through intimidation induced silence. Indeed, every day lawyers choose to take up the plight of a victim and face challenges of representing them against well-funded and mal-intention parties, or simply pass over the case because of the bully’s reputation. ??

When Plaintiffs filed their lawsuit on March 24,?2020?against four separate individuals suing Plaintiffs in four separate cases, two law firms and two lawyers, frankly, the same was perceived by some as a catalyst for peace as opposed to an overture of war. ?And, as incredible as that might sound, the undersigned believed it was possible. ? However,?in reality, Plaintiffs?IOA, John Ritenour and his son Heath Ritenour’s plan was to deliver pain to those whom they saw as a clear and present danger to their way of life and culture…. ??

The pending four lawsuits, and Louis Spagnuolo’s in particular, alleged a world within one of the largest private insurance brokerages in the country that John and Heath did not want anyone to see. ? ?However, none of the four individuals, including Spagnuolo, were the first to be courageous enough to report the wrongdoings of that inner world. ?

In response, IOA, Heath and John’s employed seemingly “legal” strategies and strong-arm tactics which, of course, are not posted on the IOA website, but, if one takes sufficient time to research the federal and state civil clerk offices in Florida, New Jersey, Texas, Illinois and throughout the country, their calling cards of using their wealth, power and influence to deliver the pain, fear and intimidation of vexatious litigation are not difficult to find. ? Nor are IOA’s infamous use of what are known as Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (“SLAPP”). ??

SLAPP lawsuits are countersuits – either offense or defensive – that drag a victim into court under the guise of defamation, tortious interference, abuse of process or manufactured contractual breaches. ?SLAPP lawsuits are designed and engineered to drain a victim’s financial resources and emotional dexterity?in order to?break them such that the victim walks away or settles without a day in court. ?

But as IOA, John and Heath, and their lawyers have come to learn, there are individuals and lawyers that believe in justice being served even if it costs them financially, physically, and emotionally and that commitment to purpose in the face of overwhelming force and odds frustrated Plaintiffs. ? ?At the same time, in candor, SLAPP lawsuits do force lawyers and small law firms to choose to allocate their resources on other legal matters or focus intently upon preparing a case to dismiss the unlawful lawsuit and these cases sometimes linger until they once again become useful to the SLAPP predator.

Here, in September 2023, Farrow and Farrow Law no longer had the choice or luxury to do anything else but to direct focus to?methodically and painstakingly review?everything?that has transpired in the proceedings and others like it to present this Motion to the Court which seeks to end IOA, John and Heath’s charade permanently. But Farrow and Farrow Law’s decision to allocate significantly more resources to this Case came under circumstances which, intentional or not, hyper-illuminated the sinister nature of these proceedings. ?

It is not Farrow or Farrow Law’s intention to distract from the other merits of this Motion by highlighting one way in which this SLAPP lawsuit has procured?[recent]?collateral damage?[to Farrow or his family].….Nonetheless,?….the cold fact about defending a SLAPP lawsuit?[is that]Farrow and Farrow law were forced to respond to….particular time sensitive?[litigation matters?while he also was handling two family?emergencies]…[a]nd?therein lies the core evil of a SLAPP lawsuit – one is forced to choose to allocate the most precious resource we as humans have – time to spend with our families – or?[defending against meritless retaliatory litigation].

#insurance #insurancenews #insurancejobs #insurancemarketing #riskmanagement #insurancebroker