"And They Are Trying To Hide The Whole Thing...."

The September 18 Objection further states that after the Fifth District Court of Appeal substantially overturned an injunction order: “Spagnuolo resumed his lawful right to investigate and obtain information through published announcements seeking information and otherwise his First Amendment Rights to report as to the status of this lawsuit and others in which Spagnuolo is a Plaintiff.”

The Objection continues: “In response, Heath, John and IOA, through the filing of the September 1 Notice of Production and the September 14 Notice of Production, have revealed their latest fraudulent and malicious schemes under the guise discovery requests, those being – to target companies who issue publications for legal counsel, as well as, LinkedIn Corporation to interfere, harass and intimidate not only Spagnuolo, but third parties who have no notice that Heath is going after their LinkedIn Accounts.”

#heathritenour #heathritenourfraud #heathritenourinsurance #inurancefraud

The September 18 Objection argues: “…the discovery was drafted so egregiously and intentionally malignant that, for example, the Request itself states:  “Private Messages (ideally all messages, but we can modify the scope if there is pushback).”   This is the very definition of bad faith discovery where it is sent out so knowingly overbroad such that “pushback” is anticipated in the actual language of the of Request.”

Spagnuolo’s September 18 Objection further states: “It is sadly ironic that Heath, John and IOA demanded an order preventing Spagnuolo from allegedly “interfering with their relationships,” but now are unapologetically and maliciously seeking to  obtain ALL of the third parties’ very personal information including, but not limited to: (1) email addresses, (2) profile photos, (3) billing information (which would include credit card information); (4) personal addresses; (5) personal phone numbers; (6) their LinkedIn search history; (7) all of their “private messages”; (8) list of all followed accounts (meaning who these third parties associate with) and (9) their purchase history.” 

Spagnuolo’s Objection also states: “…it should shock the conscience of this Court that Heath, John, IOA and others believe this invasion of individual privacy and seeking unmistakably overbroad discovery would be tolerated, especially, without due process of law for these non-parties.   At the same time, unfortunately, it should come as no surprise that Heath, John and IOA believe that this lawsuit’s province is so grand that nothing is off the table where these proceedings have consistently acted as both a shield and a sword.”