Bagen Firm Drops Response to Ignite’s Attempt to Pause Civil Lawsuit
Bagen Law Firm Attorney Christopher Chenevey has submitted a response to an attempt to pause a civil lawsuit against Ignite Life Center (ILC) Church.
In February 2025, ILC was hit with a negligence/vicarious liability lawsuit that also holds Christian Vargas personally liable for sexual battery. Vargas was previously criminally charged in 2023 for sexual offenses at ILC and the two criminal cases remain pending. The Florida Multicultural District of the Assemblies of God is also a defendant.
In August 2025, Vargas’ father and the head pastor of ILC, Mark Vega, was criminally charged for failing to report suspected child abuse. Vega and his son are both out on bond.
After Vega was charged, ILC made a motion to abate, i.e., pause the civil lawsuit pending the outcome of Vega’s criminal case. Afterwards, they made a similar motion that specifically seeks to protect the Church from evidence disclosure while Vega’s case remains pending. ILC contends that continuation of the civil lawsuit would violate Vega’s right against self-incrimination in his criminal case.
On February 23, 2026, Chenevey submitted a response in opposition to ILC’s motions. The court document states, “This matter arises from the childhood sexual abuse of Plaintiff which was perpetrated by Defendant Christian Vargas, an appointee, employee, or agent of Defendant [ILC].”
The response stresses that Vega isn’t a personal defendant in the case and that their concern lies in ILC’s “supervision, policies, practices, and conduct relating to Christian Vargas and the safety of minors attending [ILC] programs.”
The response says that ILC’s claims are not supported by any evidence.
The response holds that ILC’s argument rests on Vega’s “potential assertion of the Fifth Amendment in his criminal case. It is well established that the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination protects only natural persons and does not extend to corporations.”
The response goes on to state, “[ILC] claims that Pastor Vega's criminal case prohibits the corporation from responding to discovery. This is simply untrue. [ILC] may designate any qualified individual to respond to discovery on its behalf without relying on Pastor Vega. Officers and directors of [ILC], including Lisa Vega, Eunice Luvis, Azael Nunez, and Nicole Gomez, are publicly listed on the corporation's filings with the Florida Department of State and are each qualified individuals who could serve as corporate representatives for this purpose. By appointing one or more of these individuals, [ILC] can comply with discovery obligations and avoid any delay in this civil proceeding."
The response argues:
“First, the Plaintiff has a substantial interest in proceeding expeditiously. This case involves allegations of childhood sexual abuse. An indefinite stay tied to the resolution of a separate criminal prosecution would result in continued delay and deny Plaintiff the opportunity for timely relief.
Second, the burden on [ILC] is minimal. [ILC] may designate one or more representatives… to testify regarding matters known or reasonably available to the organization. The corporation is not limited to Pastor Vega. Indeed, [ILC] has made no evidentiary showing that no other officer or director can serve in this role.
Third, the convenience of the Court favors moving forward…
Fourth, the interests of non-parties do not support a stay. The denial of Defendant’s motion to stay does not preclude [ILC’s] employees who are not parties to the civil action from raising their Fifth Amendment rights at the proper time…
Fifth, the public interest strongly weighs against a stay. The public has a compelling interest in exposing and preventing child sexual abuse, particularly in settings where minors are entrusted to the care and supervision of adults. Courts have expressly recognized this principle.”
As of now, there aren’t any hearings scheduled for the lawsuit.
Regarding Vega's criminal case, he had a case management hearing on Monday but was not present as he waived his appearance. Vega's lawyer, Michael Hines, was also absent, having another attorney cover for him. The hearing was very short, with the substitute acknowledging that the state has named a lot of witnesses. Vega's next case management hearing is set for May 11.
