Mr. Hayes Ryan:
Thank you for your email. In over 30 years I as you well know have participated in a considerable amount of litigation. In over 30 years I have "never" been sued for defamation. The "truth" is the best defense to any claim of defamation. Since you refuse to have a meeting in order to attempt to resolve this controversy amiciably, I will inform you that the "words" on the summons, which was signed by the Judge state in plan english that the charge against all of the respondents is "criminal contempt". Had you not refused summons you would clearly have seen the charge. I did not place that language on the summon(s) that were signed by the judge. The Court did. Consequently, the allegation that the respondents are charged with "criminal contempt" is factually correct. Please advise me immediately if the respondents will waive service of process so that I can send you the summons. Under the circumstances, it will not look very good when your clients, Lance G. Johnson, David Abrams and Alfred Goodman have attempted to dodge Service for 18 months and now Gordon and Rees is following in there foot steps. Whether Gordon and Rees will acknowledge it or not for a well known law firm and three of its attorneys to be "charged" with "criminal contempt" is very serious business. I cannot understand for the life of me why a firm of your calibur would "refuse" service of summons and force me to retain a process server to effect service. Should Gordon and Rees decide to sue me, please call me 312-545-4554 so I could pick up the summons. Please advise me by email or phone by Nov 19, 2009 or sooner as to whether you will wave service of summons so that I can send your the summons and complaints. As you know we have a first hearing in December. Also advise me if Gordon and Rees will represent itself in this matter or if you plan on obtaining outside counsel. Likewise please advise me if Lance G. Johnson, David Abrams and Alfred Goodman will waive service of summons by the same date.
7115 W. North Ave #272
Oak Park, Illinois 60302
Subject: RE: Stoller v. Johnson, et al.
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:52:31 -0800
.Leo, As my letter identifies the articles on your blog that are defamatory, I see not point in meeting. As you know, no one from Gordon & Rees has been charged with criminal contempt. Rather, you simply have filed a Petition for Adjudication of Indirect Criminal Contempt Citation. To date, there has been no Show Cause hearing, and no authoritative or policing body has backed your Petition. Further, as noted on page 9 of your Appellant Brief, "[o]n June 5, 2009, Judge Flanagan denied a motion for evidentiary hearing on whether [Defendants] were telling the truth [as to service]." By claiming that I and other lawyers at Gordon & Rees have been "charged" with a crime, you have committed defamation per se. These statements, which are factually and legally inaccurate, may mislead the public into believing that criminal charges have been filed against the firm and/or named attorneys by a policing agency. In this connection, your statements have caused, and continue to cause, serious irreparable injury to this firm’s reputation and the reputation of the individual attorneys named. Given that these statements constitute defamation per se and threaten to tortuously interfere with our client relationship(s), they actionable under Illinois law. As noted in my letter of October 29, 2009, we will be taking legal action to protect the rights of this firm and its attorney’s, seeking compensatory and punitive damages. Regards, Hayes