Share

Petition No. 12-7747 for Writ of Certiorari to the SCOTUS

REASONS FOR GRANTING THE PETITION
Evidence of a crisis in the practice of law in the State of Florida.  


Former Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (r) to Scott Rothstein (l): "Scott - You are amazing!"

Supreme Court of the United States docket: Petition No. 12-7747 

Petition denied February 19, 2013; rehearing denied April 15, 2013

Petition No. 12-7747 for writ of certiorari SCOTUS
December 10, 2012
Petition No. 12-7747 Writ of Certiorari [...]
Adobe Acrobat document [1.8 MB]

In Goldfarb v. Virginia State Bar, 421 U.S. 773 (1975), the U.S. Supreme Court held that lawyers engage in "trade or commerce" and hence ended the legal profession's exemption from antitrust laws. The Florida Supreme Court has misused its monopoly over the practice of law, through malfeasance, misfeasance and nonfeasance, by and through its disciplinary arm, The Florida Bar, which unfortunately is being operated in a fashion as to protect itself and certain favored dishonest lawyers rather than the public and honest lawyers.

Federal Civil Rights, RICO, Antitrust, and ADA Lawsuit

Originally posted circa May 2010 - the case is now over

I am seeking representation in Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA, et al, case no. 05-CA-7205, Hillsborough County Circuit Civil Court, Florida, 13th Judicial Circuit, and related cases below.

For over five years I have sought representation in the matter set forth in Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint. The process has been highly inefficient. The inefficiency is due in part to the lack of an open and accessible free market for legal services. This is outrageous in a market that is billions of dollars annually.

Attempts to find counsel were, and continue to be, laborious and time-consuming. Many lawyers to whom I was referred had no interest in the matter, so that effort was wasted. As for lawyers who were interested, the information they needed to evaluate my case was sizable and onerous to provide and review in paper format. The age-old task of matching buyer and seller was more than inefficient, it was dysfunctional.


Nonetheless, a number of lawyers have advised me in this matter, although they do not want to enter an appearance. While the lawyers acknowledge I have valid claims, in essence they believe the legal system cannot hold one of its own accountable. Then there was attorney Robert W. Bauer of Gainesville, a referral from The Florida Bar Lawyer Referral Service.

Mr. Bauer represented me for over a year. One of his last statements on the record was the following: "…Mr. Rodems has, you know, decided to take a full nuclear blast approach instead of us trying to work this out in a professional manner. It is my mistake for sitting back and giving him the opportunity to take this full blast attack." (transcript, August 14, 2008, emergency hearing, the Honorable Marva Crenshaw, p. 16, line 24).


Mr. Bauer moved to withdrawal shortly thereafter. Mr. Bauer’s representation was not very effective, other than churning $33,000 in attorney’s fees. An attorney I met on Craigslist offered this insight: "I think most attorneys are shying away from it because it is a suit against other attorneys".

The Florida Bar, with more than 87,000 members, is the statewide professional and regulatory organization for lawyers. There is no corresponding entity for business or consumers. The goal of this justice network is to create an open and accessible free market for legal services.


News coverage of payday lending related to this case

Legalized Loan Sharking
Creative Loafing
by Francis X. Gilpin
January 3, 2002

Former state bureaucrat named Harry L. Hooper has a confession to make.

Hooper, a 28-year lawyer and retired U.S. Marine Corps judge advocate, was confronted with a seemingly innocuous request soon after becoming general counsel to the Florida state comptroller in 1995.

McKenzie Check Advance wondered whether it could accept post-dated checks. After some legal research, Hooper and his aides responded yes.

Hooper has regretted their answer ever since.

"We did not suspect at the time that we were launching a cottage industry of small loan operators masquerading as ... check cashers," Hooper stated in an affidavit filed on behalf of debtors who are suing so-called payday lenders. One of those racketeering lawsuits, joined by state Attorney General Bob Butterworth, is pending in Hillsborough County circuit court.

In his August 2000 sworn statement, Hooper stated: "I have become a student of this question as a result of my experience in this area. I believe as a former general counsel of the Florida Department of Banking and Finance, and as an attorney who performs pro bono service at Legal Services of North Florida, that payday lending is an evil that strikes at the heart of Florida's most unfortunate citizens. I believe payday lending is predatory lending."

That did not dissuade the Florida Legislature from legalizing the practice last year. Read more here

Read about this case in Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint

Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA, 05-CA-7205
Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, May 5, 2010
2010, 05-05-10, Plaintiff's First Amende[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [5.4 MB]

United States Court of Appeals
For The Eleventh Circuit
56 Forsyth Street
N.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30303
http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/

 

Appeal Number 12-11213-C
Gillespie v. Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Florida, et al
District Court 5:10-cv-00503

Appeal Number 12-11028-B
Gillespie v. Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Florida, et al
District Court 5:11-cv-00539

Amended Disability Motion, Declaratory Judgment, 12-11213, C.A.11
Submitted August 6, 2012
Amended Disability Motion, Declaratory J[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [2.3 MB]
Motion to Reconsider RICO, 12-11028-B, C.A.11
May 30, 2011
Motion to reconsider RICO, 12-11028-B, C[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [5.3 MB]
Consolidated Notice of Filing Letter
RE Florida AG Appearance, May 7, 2012
2012, 05-07-12, Consolidated Notice Fili[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [812.2 KB]
Notice of Clerk Mistake
April 18, 2012
2012, 04-18-12, Notice of Clerk Mistake.[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [217.0 KB]
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
Accommodation Request, April 7, 2012
2012, 04-07-12, ADA request, 11th Circui[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [66.6 KB]
Motion to Consolidate Related Appeals
March 14, 2012
2012, 03-14-12, Motion to Consolidate Re[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [1.2 MB]
Certificate of Interested Persons, 12-11028, C.A.11
Docketed March 16, 2012
Certificate of Interested Persons, 12-11[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [42.4 KB]
Certificate of Interested Persons, 12-11213, C.A.11
Docketed March 19, 2012
Certificate of Interested Persons, 12-11[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [150.1 KB]

Appeal No. 12-11028-B

U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

Pam Bondi, Attorney General
Office of Attorney General
State of Florida
The Capitol PL-01
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050

Letter to Pan Bondi, Attorney General
RE Florida AG Appearance, May 3, 2012
2012, 05-03-12, NJG letter to FL AG Pam [...]
Adobe Acrobat document [702.3 KB]

Appeal No. 12-11028-B

U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals


Robert E. O'Neill, US Attorney (former)
US Attorney's Office
Middle District of Florida              
400 N. Tampa St., Suite 3200             
Tampa, FL 33602-4798

Response from David Rhodes, Asst US Attorney
April 12, 2012
2012, 04-12-12, response from David Rhod[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [94.8 KB]
Letter to US Attorney Robert O’Neill, re appearance
April 9, 2012
2012, 04-09-12, letter to US Attorney ON[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [23.1 KB]

Counsel for Robert W. Bauer

Catherine B. Chapman
Guilday, Tucker, Schwartz & Simpson, P.A.
1983 Centre Pointe Boulevard, Suite 200
Tallahassee, FL 32308-7823

Foley & Lardner Offer of Representation & Retraction

Krista J. Sterken, Esq.
Foley & Lardner LLP
Verex Plaza
150 East Gilman Street
Madison, WI 53703-1481

Offer of representation from Krista J. Sterken, Esq. of Foley & Lardner LLP, telephone call May 25, 2011 at 11:55 AM.

Transcript of call from Ms. Sterken, May 25, 2011, Page 5

7   MS. STERKEN: Okay. Sounds good. Well, we
8   just wanted to let you know, you know, certainly we
9   would need to run conflicts and there is a process
10  before we could agree to represent you in this
11  case. But we're certainly interested. We think
12  this raises an important issue. So if you're still
13  looking for representation we would love to start
14  to look at conflicts and those other issues.

Transcript, phone call from Krista J. Sterken, Esq. of Foley & Lardner LLP, May 25, 2011 11:55 AM
2011, 05-25-11, TRANSCRIPT, phone call, [...]
Adobe Acrobat document [298.4 KB]
Notice of Filing Transcript, phone call with Krista J. Sterken, Foley & Lardner, case 5:10-cv-00503
49 09-30-11, Notice of Filing, call with[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [443.4 KB]

Ms. Sterken was co-counsel with attorney Michael D. Leffel, Esq., a partner at Foley & Lardner LLP, who filed an amicus brief in Turner v. Rogers, U.S. Docket 10-10. Ms. Sterken responded to my email and motion for appointment of counsel. (below) 

Gillespie email and Motion for Appointment of Counsel, ADA, Memo of Law, May 25, 2011
2011, 05-25-11, Gillespie email re Turne[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [320.0 KB]

In Turner the U.S. Supreme Court considered whether an indigent person facing incarceration on civil contempt had a right to counsel. The Supreme Court found no automatic right to counsel for indigent civil defendants facing jail time, but it ruled on behalf of a father who served a year in prison for failing to pay child support. The Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that the father, Michael Turner, was deprived of his 14th Amendment right to due process.

Foley & Lardner LLP, Wikipedia

Michael D. Leffel, Esq.
Foley & Lardner LLP
Verex Plaza
150 East Gilman Street
Madison, WI 53703-1481

From the letter of Michael D. Leffel, Foley & Lardner LLP, May 27, 2011 declining representation:

"Each year, we receive a large number of requests for pro bono representation and we are unable to honor all requests. We evaluate each case based on a number of factors, as well as considering the demands of our current case load, before deciding whether we are able to offer representation. For a variety of reasons, including the press of other business, we are unfortunately unable to represent you in connection with this matter."

Letter of Michael D. Leffel, Foley & Lardner LLP, decline representation, May 27, 2011
2011, 05-27-11, Foley Lardner letter, d[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [75.8 KB]
Email of Foley & Lardner LLP, May 27, 2011 decline representation, May 27, 2011
2011, 05-27-11, Foley Lardner email, de[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [48.3 KB]
Neil Gillespie email to Michael D. Leffel, Foley & Lardner LLP for reconsideration, June 30, 2011
2011, 06-30-11, Gillespie email to Mr Le[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [21.8 KB]
Ryan Rodems

Counsel for Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A. et al.

Ryan Christopher Rodems

Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A.
400 North Ashley Drive, Suite 2100
Tampa, Florida 33602

Mr. Rodems unethically represented his firm and law partner William J. Cook against Gillespie, contrary to the holding of McPartland v. ISI Inv. Services, Inc., 890 F.Supp. 1029, M.D.Fla., 1995. McPartland has been a mandatory authority on disqualification in the Middle District of Florida since entered June 30, 1995 by Judge Kovachevich. Also see U.S. v. Culp, 934 F.Supp. 394. Read more here

McPartland v. ISI Inv. Services, Inc., 890 F.Supp. 1029, M.D.Fla., 1995
McPartland v. ISI Inv. Services, Inc., 8[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [324.3 KB]
U.S. v. Culp, 934 F.Supp. 394
U.S. v. Culp, 934 F.Supp. 394, M.D.Fla.,[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [109.0 KB]
Ryan Rodems

Since March 3, 2006 Mr. Rodems directed, with malice aforethought, a course of harassing conduct toward Gillespie that aggravated his disability, caused substantial emotional distress and served no legitimate purpose. Mr. Rodems’ unprofessional conduct is apparent in his letter to Gillespie dated December 13, 2006. For example:

"I recognize that you are a bitter man who apparently has been victimized by your own poor choices in life. You also claim to have mental or psychological problems, of which I have never seen documentation. However, your behavior in this case has been so abnormal that I would not disagree with your assertions of mental problems." (P1, 3)

"So, in addition to your case's lack of merit, you are cheap and not willing to pay the required hourly rates for representation." (P3, 2).

Letter of Ryan Christopher Rodems to Gillespie
December 13, 2006
2006, 12-13-06, Rodems letter (diatribe)[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [536.3 KB]
Ryan Rodems

Mr. Rodems prevented the lawful adjudication of both the state and federal cases through his repeated violation of FL Bar Rule 4-3.3 Candor Toward The Tribunal.

Mr. Rodems made numerous false statements of material fact to the tribunal, failed to cooperate with opposing counsel, and disrupted the tribunal for strategic advantage.

 

The state court action turned into a personal vendetta for Rodems January 19, 2006 when Rodems commenced a vexatious libel counterclaim against Gillespie, which Rodems pursued vexatiously through September 28, 2010 whereupon Rodems voluntarily dismissed the case without prejudice. 

 

Mr. Rodems failed to disclose to the court legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel. As set forth in the Petition (SC11-1622) to the Florida Supreme Court, Mr. Rodems made false statements to the tribunal to have an arrest warrant issued for Gillespie for the purpose of forcing a walk-away settlement agreement in the state court case, and to force a walk-away settlement agreement in this Court for my federal civil rights and ADA disability lawsuit. 

Mr. Rodems repeated violation of FL Bar Rule 4-3.3, Candor Toward The Tribunal
Exh 1, Bar Rule 4-3, Ryan Christopher Ro[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [1.1 MB]

The case is Neil J Gillespie v. Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Florida, et al., Case No. 5:10-cv-00503-WTH-DAB, US District Court, Middle District of Florida, Ocala Division, filed September 28, 2010. The Complaint is below in PDF.


This lawsuit is about the basic requirements of justice, fairness and equality that we should all expect from our courts. The ADA part of this lawsuit is relevant to persons with disabilities and access to courts. The Civil Rights part of the lawsuit is important to all pro se litigants. Judge Isom’s essay, Professionalism and Litigation Ethics, 28 STETSON L. REV. 323, describes a two-tier legal system in Florida favoring certain attorneys.

Neil J Gillespie v. Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Florida, et al., Case No. 5:11-cv-00539-WTH-DAB, September 16, 2011

Florida Freight Terminals, Inc. v. Cabanas, 354 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App., 3d Dist. 1978). In connection with the requirement in wrongful death actions of an underlying tort or breach of duty, proof of the defendant’s violation of a statute or regulatory provision that either is designed to protect a particular class of persons from their inability to protect themselves or establishes a duty to take precautions to guard a certain class of persons from a specific type of injury, establishes negligence per se.

 

Eggshell skull rule

 

Doctrine that makes a defendant liable for the plaintiff's unforeseeable and uncommon reactions to the defendant's negligent or intentional tort.  If the defendant commits a tort against the plaintiff without a complete defense, the defendant becomes liable for any injury that is magnified by the plaintiff's peculiar characteristics.

First Amended Complaint, 5:11-cv-539-WTH-TBS (with exhibits)
January 17, 2012 (with exhibits)
15 01-17-12, First Amended Complaint (PA[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [31.8 MB]
First Amended Complaint, 5:11-cv-539-WTH-TBS
January 17, 2012
15 01-17-12, First Amended Complaint (PA[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [1.3 MB]

Neil J Gillespie v. Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Florida, et al., Case No. 5:10-cv-00503-WTH-DAB, September 28, 2010

Order, Denied Motion to Amend the Judgment
March 29, 2012
69 Order, Denied motion Amend Judgment, [...]
Adobe Acrobat document [19.8 KB]
Motion to Amend the Judgment, Rule 59
March 27, 2012
68 03-27-12, Motion to Amend the Judgmen[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [1.3 MB]
Notice of Appeal, 5:10-cv-00503
March 2, 2012
66 03-02-12, Notice of Appeal, (PACER).p[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [29.4 KB]
Judgment in a Civil Case
February 28, 2012
65 02-28-12, Judgment in a Civil Case (p[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [69.1 KB]
Order, Complaint Dismissed
February 27, 2012
64 02-27-12, Order of Dismissal (pacer).[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [21.7 KB]
Notice of Objection
January 12, 2012
63 01-12-12, Notice of Objection (PACER)[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [62.4 KB]
Notice of Filing, Petition Mandamus, SC11-1622
January 10, 2012
62 01-10-12, Notice of Filing, Petition [...]
Adobe Acrobat document [2.8 MB]
Notice of Filing Affidavit, NJG re Castagliuolo
January 10, 2012
61 01-10-12, Notice of Filing Affidavit,[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [2.6 MB]
Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion Submit Addendum
November 23, 2011
60 11-23-11, P's motion file addendum, R[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [2.2 MB]
Plaintiff’s Response to Order To Show Cause
November 9, 2011
58 11-09-11, P's response, Order to Show[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [10.1 MB]
Order to Show Cause
October 19, 2011
53 10-19-11, Order show cause, case mana[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [55.4 KB]
Order, Denied Motion to Strike, Set Aside
October 6, 2011
51 10-06-11, Order, denied Set Aside (pa[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [134.6 KB]

Motion To Strike Notice of Assignment of Claims, Motion to Strike Dismissal of Action with Prejudice, Motion To Strike Settlement Agreement Made While In Custody of the HCSO

Motion to Strike Assignment, Settlement, Dismissal
June 30, 2011, with exhibits
2011, 06-30-11, Plaintiff NJG, Motion St[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [6.4 MB]
Motion to Strike Assignment, Settlement, Dismissal
June 30, 2011, without exhibits
2011, 06-30-11, NJG Motion Strike, Set A[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [657.2 KB]
Notice of Plaintiff Neil Gillespie, re Former Counsel
June 30, 2011
2011, 06-30-11, Plaintiff NJG notice re [...]
Adobe Acrobat document [206.7 KB]
Federal Complaint, Gillespie v 13th Circuit, PACER
September 28, 2010
2010, 09-28-10, federal complaint, Gille[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [1.3 MB]
Federal Complaint, Gillespie v 13th Circuit, w/exhibits
September 28, 2010
2010, 09-28-10, federal complaint, Gille[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [22.6 MB]

Biographies of Federal Court Judges Sitting in Florida

The following biographies of Federal Court Judges sitting in Florida were compiled during the summer of 2011. Each judge was sent a questionnaire and responded by listing year of current appointment, prior judgeships, birth dates, education and previous legal employment. Some judges also provided additional information relating to teaching positions, professional associations, honors and awards, and published works. The questionnaire was informal and voluntary. Entries for judges who did not respond to the questionnaire were compiled from secondary sources, Read more here

United States District Court
Middle District of Florida, Ocala Division
Golden-Collum Memorial Federal Building & US Courthouse
207 NW Second Street
Ocala, Florida 34475-6666
Telephone: (352) 369-4860


PACER login, US Dist. Ct., MD of Florida

The Honorable Anne C. Conway, Chief District Judge

Chief Judge Conway

The Honorable Anne C. Conway
Chief United States District Judge

The Honorable Anne C. Conway is a United States District Judge for the Middle District of Florida. She was appointed by President George H. W. Bush in 1991, and is presently the Chief Judge of the Middle District of Florida. She is resident in the Orlando Division.

Judge Conway currently serves on the Judicial Conference Committee on Defender Services and served on the Case Management / Electronic Case Filing Working Advisory Group. Prior to becoming chief judge she chaired the Middle District of Florida Budget Committee and participated in several other court committees including Security, Space and Facilities, Case Management, and Automation. Judge Conway served on the Board of Directors of the Federal Judges Association from 2001 - 2004 and was Eleventh Circuit membership chair from 2003 - 2007.

Judge Conway presently serves on the University of Florida Law Center Association Board of Trustees and the Board of Advisors for the Center for Governmental Responsibility. She participated in the Center’s Annual Conferences on Legal & Policy Issues in the Americas in Lima, Peru in May 2006 and Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in May 2008 speaking on Judicial Education and Professionalism. She also served as a panelist for the Center for Governmental Responsibility’s inaugural symposium on the topic of A Privacy Law: Perspectives of National Security, the First Amendment, the Media, and the Individual.

Judge Conway attended the University of Florida College of Law, graduating with honors in 1975. She served as an executive editor of the law review. As a result of her work for the Center for Governmental Responsibility, she received the McIntosh Foundation Award. In addition, Judge Conway served as a Legal Aid Student Intern.

Judge Conway began her legal career with a federal clerkship with the Honorable John A. Reed, Jr. in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. After completing her clerkship Judge Conway joined the firm of Young, Turnbull & Linscott, P.A. as an associate. In June 1978 she began practicing with the firm of Wells, Gattis & Hallowes, P.A., where she became a partner/shareholder of the firm in March 1981. In July 1982 Judge Conway joined the firm of Carlton, Fields, Ward, Emmanuel, Smith & Cutler, P.A. She became a shareholder of the firm in February 1985.

While in private practice as a member of The Florida Bar, Judge Conway was admitted to practice before the United States Supreme Court, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and the United States District Courts for the Middle, Northern and Southern Districts of Florida. (Source: Biography of The Honorable Anne C. Conway, http://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/judicialInfo/Orlando/JgConway.htm)

The Honorable Anne C. Conway, Chief District Judge, Wikipedia

Reply letter from The Honorable Anne C. Conway
April 25, 2012 to Neil Gillespie
2012, 04-25-12, letter of Chief Judge An[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [70.8 KB]
Letter to The Honorable Anne C. Conway
March 22, 2012, Neil Gillespie
2012, 03-22-12, Chief Judge Anne C. Conw[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [2.5 MB]

The Hon. Wm. Terrell Hodges, Senior U.S. Judge

Judge Hodges

The Honorable William Terrell Hodges

Senior United States Judge

 

American Inns of Court
2007 Professionalism Award for the Eleventh Circuit


Judge Terrell Hodges, the widely esteemed senior judge from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, was selected to receive the 2007 Professionalism Award for the Eleventh Circuit. Read more here

Judge Hodges was appointed as a United States District Judge for the Middle District of Florida in 1971 after thirteen years of private practice with a law firm in Tampa. He received his B.S. and J.D. degrees, and an Honorary Doctor of Laws degree, from the University of Florida. He was Chief Judge of the District 1982-1989, and served as Chairman of the Committee on Pattern Jury Instructions in the Fifth Circuit, and later the Eleventh Circuit, from 1977 to 2005; President, District Judges Association of the Eleventh Circuit, 1981-1982; President, Tampa Chapter, American Inns of Court, 1987-1989; Circuit Council, Eleventh Circuit, 1981-1986; Judicial Conference Committee on the Operation of the Jury System, 1982-1987; Subcommittee on Pattern Jury Instructions of the Federal Judicial Center, 1982-1987; Bench Book Committee of the Federal Judicial Center, Chairman, 1987-1993; Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules, 1987-1993, Chairman, 1990-1993; Member Judicial Conference Ad Hoc Committee on Habeas Corpus Reform (Chaired by Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr.); Member, District Judges Advisory Group, United States Sentencing Commission, 1996; Member, Judicial Conference of the United States, District Judge Representative of the Eleventh Circuit, 1993-1999; Chairman, District Judge Representatives to the Judicial Conference, 1997; Member, Executive Committee of the Judicial Conference, 1994-1999, Chairman, 1996-1999; Chairman, Ad Hoc Committee of the Judicial Conference to study relations with the Federal Judicial Center, 1997-1998; Chairman, United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, 2000 - 2007. (Source: Biography of The Honorable Wm. Terrell Hodges, http://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/)

The Hon. Wm. Terrell Hodges, Senior U.S. Judge, Wikipedia

The Hon. Thomas B. Smith, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Magistrate Smith

The Honorable Thomas B. Smith
United States Magistrate Judge

Biography: The Honorable Thomas B. Smith became a United States Magistrate Judge on July 25, 2011 and is presently resident in the Ocala Division.

Judge Smith attended the University of Florida College of Law, graduating in 1977. His past employment includes three years as an Assistant State Attorney in the Ninth Judicial Circuit of Florida before joining Maguire, Voorhis & Wells, PA where he began as an associate before becoming a shareholder. In 1998, the Maguire firm sold its practice to Holland & Knight at which time Judge Smith became a partner in the amalgamated firm. In December, 2001 Governor Jeb Bush appointed Judge Smith to the Circuit Court bench which job he assumed in January, 2002. As a Circuit Court Judge he served four years in a felony division, three years in domestic relations and was sitting in the complex business litigation court when he was selected as a Magistrate Judge.

Judge Smith is the immediate past Chairman of the Florida Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions-Contract and Business Cases. He serves on the Executive Council of the Business Law Section of the Florida Bar and prior to becoming a federal judge he was a director and member of the Executive Committee of the American College of Business Court Judges, a director of the George C. Young First Central Florida American Inn of Court and a director of the Central Florida Family Law Inn of Court. he also served on the Orange County Bar Association Professionalism Committee and the Orange County Bar Judicial Relations Committee. (Source: Biography of The Honorable Thomas B. Smith, http://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/)

The Hon. David A. Baker, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Hon. David A, Baker (left)

The Hon. David A. Baker

United States Magistrate Judge


David A. Baker ’76, left, received the 2011 William M. Hoeveler Judicial Award, presented at the judicial luncheon of the annual Florida Bar Convention in Orlando in June. The award recognizes a judge who "exemplifies strength of character, service, and competence as a jurist, lawyer and public servant." Baker is a U.S. Magistrate Judge for the Middle District of Florida. Read more

Hon. David A. Baker
Legal Span

HONORABLE DAVID A. BAKER is a United States Magistrate Judge for the Middle District of Florida (Orlando Division). He was formerly a partner of the law firm of Foley & Lardner of Orlando and Milwaukee concentrating his commercial litigation practice in the Uniform Commercial Code, administrative law, tax, environmental, governmental and land use development and securities fraud litigation. He commenced his legal career as law clerk to United States District Judge J. Calvitt Clarke, Jr. in Norfolk, Virginia. He is presently a member of the Committee on Automation and Technology, Judicial Conference of the United States. He was an Adjunct Instructor at the University of Central Florida Legal Studies Department teaching Legal Ethics and a lecturer at various continuing education seminars on federal court practice, automation issues and environmental and labor law. Judge Baker has also served on Committees of the Federal Magistrate Judges Association; Advisory Groups on Chambers and Courtroom Automation and Technology and Magistrate Judges Advisory Group of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts; the Bench Bar Relations Committee and Professionalism Committee of the Orange County Bar Association; and the Appellate Advocacy Committee of the Lawyers Conference of the Judicial Administration Division of the American Bar Association. He is the author of "Condemnation Damages" (published by the State Bar of Wisconsin).

Sheryl L. Loesch, Clerk of Court

Sheryl L. Loesch

Sheryl L. Loesch, Clerk of Court
U.S. District Court

Middle District of Florida
401 West Central Boulevard, Suite 1200
Orlando, Florida 32801-0120


Sheryl L. Loesch, from The International Association For Court Administration

Sheryl L. Loesch has served as the Clerk of Court for the United States District Court, Middle District of Florida since 1999. She previously served as the Chief Deputy Clerk for the United States District Court, District of Kansas from 1996-1999. Prior to relocating to Kansas, Ms. Loesch served as the Division Manager in the Jacksonville Division of the Middle District of Florida from 1989-1996. Ms. Loesch became the President of the Federal Court Clerk’s Association in July 2005. She is one of the founding Board Members of the newly established International Association of Court Administration, which held its first conference in September 2004 in Ljubljana, Slovenia. In 2004, Sheryl assisted as a consultant on a USAID project in Egypt. She is also a member of the District Clerks Advisory Group of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. She has served as a trainer and facilitator for the Federal Judicial Center and has facilitated several programs on the Federal Judiciary’s Television Network (FJTN). Ms. Loesch earned her Master’s Degree in Public Administration in 1987 and her Bachelor’s Degree in Social and Behavioral Sciences in 1982 both from the University of South Florida in Tampa.

A native of Pittsburgh, PA, Sheryl has lived in Florida most of her adult life. She enjoys traveling, riding bikes, weight training, and outdoor photography.

Letter to Sheryl L. Loesch, Clerk of Court
April 5, 2012
2012, 04-05-12, letter Sheryl L. Loesch,[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [1.9 MB]

Independence of the Federal Courts

The promise of the federal courts, in contrast to the state court system, is judicial independence. The title of federal judge means a judge appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the United States Senate in accordance with the United States Constitution, also known as an Article III federal judge. Article III federal judges serve "during good behavior" and often paraphrased as appointed "for life". Judges hold their seats until they resign, die, or are removed from office. Federal judges have perhaps the best job security available in the United States. Moreover, the Constitution forbids Congress to diminish a federal judge's salary.

In the United States federal courts, magistrate judges are appointed to assist United States district court judges in the performance of their duties. Magistrate judges are authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 631. Magistrate judges are appointed by a majority vote of the federal district judges of a particular district and serve terms of eight years if full-time, or four years if part-time, and may be reappointed. Magistrate judges of limited tenure are sometimes referred to as Article I judges. Article I judges are not subject to the Article III protections. For example, these judges do not enjoy life tenure, and Congress may reduce their salaries.

Because Article III of the United States Constitution vests the judicial powers in courts to which the judges are appointed for life (and which are therefore called Article III tribunals), decisions of a magistrate judge are subject to review and either approval, modification or reversal by a district judge of that court, except in civil cases where the parties consent in advance to allow the magistrate judge to exercise the jurisdiction of the district judge. Read more

NOTICE to pro se litigants about U.S. Magistrate Judges

The ordinary person, or pro se litigant, may not understand the significant difference between a U.S. magistrate judge, and federal judge, also known as an Article III judge. Be aware that the difference between these two types of judges is important and significant, especially to the pro se litigant.

In short, an Article III federal judge is the real deal, while a U.S. magistrate judge is not. In the typical federal civil lawsuit both kinds of judges often preside over the same case. As outline above, an Article III federal judge is thought to be truly independent because of the lifetime appointment by the President of the United States and confirmation by the United States Senate in accordance with the United States Constitution.

In contrast, a U.S. magistrate judge has a limited term, depends on the approval of his peers for reappointment, and therefore is not truly independent. In other words, a U.S. magistrate judge faces some of the same pitfalls of a state court judge.

 

Federal Judgeships, U.S. Courts website

United States federal judge, Wikipedia

Magistrate Judgeships, U.S. Courts website

United States magistrate judge, Wikipedia


The following case illustrates the role of the magistrate judge and federal judge, and some of the pitfalls involved. In Armor Screen Corp v. Storm Catcher, Inc., 709 F.Supp.2d 1309, S.D. Florida, the federal U.S. District Court Judge, Kenneth L. Ryskamp, adopted Report and Recommendation (on disqualification of counsel) of Ann E. Vitunac, the U.S. Magistrate Judge, and disqualified counsel.


A magistrate Report and Recommendation is authorized under 28 U.S.C. § 636. As shown in the Armor Screen Corp. case, a party shall serve and file written objections, if any, to the Report and Recommendation with the U.S. District Judge within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), Failure to file timely objections may limit the scope of appellate review of factual findings contained herein.

 

The forgoing is provided without charge for educational purposes only. Contact a licensed attorney for legal advice.

Armor Screen Corp v. Storm Catcher, Inc
709 F.Supp.2d 1309, S.D. Florida
Armor Screen Corp v. Storm Catcher, Inc,[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [1.4 MB]

Cornell University Law School

 

28 USC § 455 - Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge

(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. Read more here

Example of an Order of recusal, U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson, Middle District of Florida
2007, 08-13-07, Order of recusal, Magist[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [32.5 KB]

Title II ADA Discrimination Complaint

U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Disability Rights - NYAV
Washington, D.C. 20530

Reply of Jeanine Worden, August 3, 2011
DOJ Disability Rights Section, letter with referrals
2011, 08-03-11, Jeanine Worden, Deputy C[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [188.4 KB]
Letter to Pres Obama, DOJ Holder
May 5, 2011
2011, 05-05-11, letter to Pres Obama, DO[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [122.8 KB]
Title II ADA Complaint, form OMB No. 1190-0009
April 21, 2011
2011, 04-21-11, Federal Title II ADA Com[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [348.3 KB]

Department of Justice Complaint, No. DJ 144-17M-0

Mark J. Kappelhoff, Section Chief
US Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division, Criminal Section
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, Northwest
Washington, DC 20530

NJG to Mark Kappelhoff, re, color of law complaint
April 21, 2011
2011, 04-21-11, NJG to DOJ, M Kappelhoff[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [792.3 KB]
Response of Mark Kappelhoff, DOJ
January 31, 2011
2011, 01-31-11, response, Mark Kappelhof[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [70.6 KB]
Complaint to US Asst Attr General, color of law
October 7, 2010
2010, 10-07-10, NJG, complaint to US Ass[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [171.2 KB]

Florida Supreme Court Case No. SC11-1622

Florida Supreme Court

Case Docket
Case Number: SC11-1622
NEIL J. GILLESPIE vs. BARKER, RODEMS & COOK, ET AL.
Lower Tribunal Case(s): 2D10-5197, 05-CA-7205

Motion for leave, addendum, toll time, SC11-1622
March 22, 2012
2012, 03-22-12, Motion for leave, addend[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [191.4 KB]
Motion for Leave, Reconsideration of Single Issue
March 19, 2012
2012, 03-19-12, Motion for leave to reco[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [908.0 KB]
Petition Denied SC11-1622
2012, 03-12-12
2012, 03-12-12, Petition Denied SC11-162[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [93.3 KB]
Petition Writ of Mandamus, Case No. SC11-1622
Florida Supreme Court, June 9, 2012
Gillespie Petition Writ of Mandamus, FL [...]
Adobe Acrobat document [208.8 KB]
Certificate of Service
June 10, 2012
Certificate of Service, June 10, 2012.pd[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [71.8 KB]
Affidavit of Neil J. Gillespie, June 6, 2012
Representation by Eugene P. Castagliuolo
AFFIDAVIT, NJG, re Castagliuolo Jun-06-1[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [3.9 MB]
Addendum Motion Extend, Toll Time
January 2, 2012
Addendum Motion Extend, Toll Time, Jan-0[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [143.5 KB]
Granted Motion to Extend Time to Dec-27-11
December 6, 2011
2011, 12-06-11, Granted motion extend ti[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [35.2 KB]
Petitioner's Second Motion to Extend Time
October 31, 2011
2011, 10-31-11, Motion for second extens[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [100.3 KB]
Granted Motion to Extend Time to Nov-07-2011
October 6, 2011
2011, 10-06-11, Granted motion extend ti[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [36.3 KB]
Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time to File Writ
August 29, 2011
2011, 08-29-11, Petitioner's Motion Exte[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [359.7 KB]
Petitioner may seek Writ of Mandamus
August 22, 2011
2011, 08-22-11, Petitioner may seek Writ[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [62.1 KB]
Acknowledgment of New Case
August 22, 2011
2011, 08-22-11, Acknowledgment of New Ca[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [45.6 KB]
Florida Supreme Court Case Docket
Case Number: SC11-1622
2011, 08-23-11, docket SC11-1622.pdf
Adobe Acrobat document [34.5 KB]

Petitioner's Notice of Appeal, filed in this Court on August 8, 2011, has been treated as a petition for writ of mandamus seeking reinstatement of the proceedings in the district court of appeal below. Petitioner is allowed to and including September 12, 2011, in which to file a proper petition for writ of mandamus; that complies with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.100, addressing why the proceedings in the district court of appeal should not have been dismissed. The failure to file a proper petition with this Court within the time provided could result in the imposition of sanctions, including dismissal of this case. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.410. Please understand that once this case is dismissed, it may not be subject to reinstatement.

Florida Supreme Court Case No. SC11-858

The Florida Supreme Court
500 South Duval Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399
(850) 488-0125

Mr. Thomas D. Hall
Clerk of the Court

Order, DENIED petition for writ prohibition, habeas
May 18, 2011
2011, 05-18-11, Order, petition for writ[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [60.8 KB]
Petition for writ of prohibition, habeas corpus
May 3, 2011
2011, 05-03-11, Petition writ, prohibiti[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [7.0 MB]

Second District Court of Appeal, Case No. 2D11-2127

Second District Court of Appeal
1005 E. Memorial Blvd.
Lakeland, FL 33801
Telephone: (863) 499-2290

James R. Birkhold
Clerk of the Court 

2dDCA Case No. 2D11-2127
Verified Emergency Petition For Writ of Prohibition
Motion For Change of Venue, May 2, 2011

Lower Tribunal: Gillespie v Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA, Case No. 05-CA-007205, Hillsborough Co., Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Florida 

AMENDED Order, DENIED petition writ of prohibition
May 6, 2011
2011, 05-06-11, AMENDED Order, DENIED pe[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [29.5 KB]
Order, DENIED petition for writ of habeas corpus
May 4, 2011 (obvious error, habeas not sought)
2011, 05-04-11, Order, DENIED petition f[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [49.0 KB]
Verified Emergency Petition For Writ of Prohibition
Motion For Change of Venue, May 2, 2011
2011, 05-02-11, Petition, Writ of Prohib[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [798.4 KB]

Note: The appeal of Final Summary Judgment is further down this page, see case 2D10-5197.

 

Pleadings in Gillespie v Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA, et. al., Case No. 05-CA-007205, Circuit Civil Court, Hillsborough County, Florida, 13th Judicial Circuit

George E. Edgecomb Courthouse, Tampa, Florida

 

Judge James D. Arnold wrongfully issued a politically motivated arrest warrant on the motion of Ryan Christopher Rodems in Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A., 05-CA-007205, Hillsborough Circuit Court, Florida.

 

Judge Martha J. Cook denied the basic requirements of justice, fairness and equality that we should all expect from our courts in order to help her campaign supporter Ryan Christopher Rodems in Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A., 05-CA-007205. Judge Cook’s departure from the Code of Judicial Conduct and the rule of law offends public policy. 

Judge Claudia Rickert Isom’s essay, Professionalism and Litigation Ethics, 28 STETSON L. REV. 323 (1998), describes a two-tier legal system in Florida. Judge Isom favors intensive case management for lawyers to avoid costly sanctions. Judge Isom offers little case management to pro se litigants to slam them with sanctions instead. 

To view the online docket, follow the below URL link to the Clerk of Court, Thirteenth Judicial Circuit 

P’s Motion to Strike Joint Stipulation for Dismissal, motion only, no exhibits
July 6, 2011, Motion to Strike Settlement Agreement
2011, 07-06-11, Motion Strike Joint Stip[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [193.4 KB]
P’s Motion to Strike Joint Stipulation for Dismissal, with exhibits
July 6, 2011, Motion to Strike Settlement Agreement
2011, 07-06-11, Motion Strike Joint Stip[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [12.8 MB]
Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel, and Memo of Law, Case 05-CA-7205
Hillsborough Co., FL, May 24, 2011 (63 pages)
2011, 05-24-11, P's Motion For Appointme[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [308.7 KB]
Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, May 5, 2010
Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA, 05-CA-7205
2010, 05-05-10, Plaintiff's First Amende[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [5.4 MB]
Emergency Motion To Disqualify BRC and Mr. Rodems as Counsel, with exhibits 1-20
July 9, 2010
2010, 07-09-10, Emerg Motion Disqualify [...]
Adobe Acrobat document [12.3 MB]
Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration, Disqualify Counsel (Rodems 05-CA-7205), Dec-11-2006
Plaintiff's Motion Reconsideration, Disq[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [1.5 MB]
TRANSCRIPT, Judge Isom, Hearing, Rodems 05-CA-7205, February 5, 2007
TRANSCRIPT, Judge Isom, Hearing Feb-05-2[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [3.4 MB]
Plaintiff's Motion to Disqualify Counsel (Rodems)
February 4, 2006, Case No. 05-CA-7205
Plaintiff's Motion Disqualify Counsel (R[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [187.5 KB]
TRANSCRIPT, Nielsen J., Hearing Disqualify Counsel
April 25, 2006 (Rodems 05-CA-7205)
TRANSCRIPT, Judge Nielsen, Hearing Disqu[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [1.5 MB]
Defendants' Answer, Affirm Defense, Counterclaim
January 19, 2006
2006, 01-19-06, Defendants Answer, Affir[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [512.5 KB]
Order on Defendants Motion to Dismiss and Strike
January 13, 2006
2006, 01-13-06, Order on Defendants' Mot[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [101.1 KB]
Original Pro Se Complaint
August 11, 2005
2005, 08-11-05, original pro se complain[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [1.0 MB]

$500,000 in payments to Florida

Donald Weidner, FSU Law Dean

The Florida Attorney General intervened in Neil Gillespie v. ACE Cash Express, Inc., Hillsborough Circuit Civil, Consolidated Case No. 99-9730, Division J (originally case no. 8:00-CV-723-T-23B, in United States District Court, Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division). The Florida AG and ACE entered a Settlement Agreement December 30, 2002. (Exhibit 21, Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, see above).

ACE paid a total of $500,000 in settlement and for issuance by the Florida Department of Banking and Finance, Division of Securities and Finance ("DBF") of authorizations, licenses, or other approvals necessary for ACE to continue in business in Florida, and for releases and other stipulations. ACE paid $250,000 to the DBF Regulatory Trust Fund in full satisfaction of all attorney's fees, costs, and other expenses incurred by the DBF in connection with this matter.

ACE made a contribution of $250,000 to the Florida State University College of Law in full satisfaction of all attorney's fees, costs and other expenses incurred by the Attorney General in connection with this matter. ACE also agreed to loan forgiveness by an affiliated company, Goleta National Bank for the "Goleta Loan Consumers" with an independent audit paid by ACE.

When I requested assistance from FSU College of Law, Dean Weidner was unable help or even make a referral. As for the referral, Weidner said "I would like to make a referral, but no one comes to mind." Below is our correspondence in PDF.

Letter to Dean Weidner, May 10, 2010
2010, 05-10-10, NJG to Don Weidner, Fla.[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [78.2 KB]
Reply of Dean Weidner, May 26, 2010
2010, 05-26-10, reply of Dean Weidner.pd[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [34.0 KB]

12-30-02, ACE agreement with Fla AG, $250K to USF Law
See page 8 for reference to Neil Gillespie’s lawsuit

12-30-02, ACE agreement with AG, $250K to USF Law
See page 8 for reference to Neil Gillespie’s lawsuit
12-30-02, ACE settlement, Fla AG, $250K [...]
Adobe Acrobat document [1.0 MB]

$250,000 check to FSU College of Law

Second District Court of Appeal, Case No: 2D10-5197

Second District Court of Appeal
1005 E. Memorial Blvd.
Lakeland, FL 33801
Telephone: (863) 499-2290

James R. Birkhold
Clerk of the Court


2dDCA Case No. 2D10-5197
Appeal: Final Summary Judgment As To Count 1
Appeal: Order Adjudging Plaintiff Neil J. Gillespie Contempt

 

Lower Tribunal: Gillespie v Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA, Case No. 05-CA-007205, Hillsborough Co., Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Florida

2dDCA transmittal to Florida Supreme Court
August 8, 2011
2011, 08-08-11, 2dDCA transmittal to Flo[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [50.6 KB]
Appellant's Notice of Appeal
July 29, 2011
2011, 07-29-11, Appellant's Notice of Ap[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [149.5 KB]
ORDER, Motion to Reinstate Dismissed Appeal Denied
July 26, 2011
2011, 07-26-11, Order, Denied.pdf
Adobe Acrobat document [624.1 KB]
Motion for Leave to Reply
July 21, 2011
2011, 07-21-11, Motion for Leave to Repl[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [95.4 KB]
Appellant’s Motion to Amend Notice of Appeal
July 18, 2011
2011, 07-18-11, Motion to Amend Notice o[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [1.2 MB]
Appellant’s Notice of Filing
July 18, 2011
2011, 07-18-11, Notice of Filing, 2D10-5[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [94.6 KB]
ORDER, Appellees directed to respond within 12 days to motion to reinstate appeal
July 11, 2011
2011, 07-11-11, ORDER, appellees directe[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [255.8 KB]
Appellant’s Motion To Reinstate Dismissed Appeal (with exhibits)
July 1, 2011, Case No. 2D10-5197, 2d DCA, FL
2011, 07-01-11. Motion to Reinstate Dism[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [12.6 MB]
Appellant’s Motion To Reinstate Dismissed Appeal (w/o exhibits)
July 1, 2011, Case No. 2D10-5197, 2d DCA, FL
2011, 07-01-11. Motion to Reinstate Dism[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [457.3 KB]
Appeal Dismissed
June 24, 2011
2011, 06-24-11, Appeal Dismissed, 2D10-5[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [27.7 KB]
Notice of Dismissal With Prejudice
June 21, 2011, Made Under Duress While In Custody
2011, 06-21-11, Notice of Dismissal With[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [36.3 KB]
Order GRANTED motion, brief due July 6, 2011
June 23, 2011
2011, 06-23-11, Order granting motion, s[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [258.6 KB]
Appellant's Motion For Extension of Time, 2D10-5197
June 21, 2011
2011, 06-21-11, Appellant's Motion for E[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [223.1 KB]
Order GRANTED, extenion of time to June 22, 2011
May 25, 2011
2011, 05-25-11, Order, Granted extension[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [42.7 KB]
Appellant's Motion For Extension of Time
May 19, 2011
2011, 05-19-11, Appellant's Motion For E[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [149.9 KB]
Order, DENIED stay, protection, GRANTED time
May 2, 2011
2011, 05-02-11,Order, DENIED stay, prote[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [33.1 KB]
ADDENDUM, Appellant’s Verified Emergency Motion To Stay Pending Appeal, Motion for Order of Protection
April 25, 2011
2011, 04-25-11, Addendum, Motion to Stay[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [265.0 KB]
Appellant’s Verified Emergency Motion To Stay Pending Appeal, Motion For Order Of Protection,
And Motion For Extension Of Time, April 25, 2011
2011, 04-25-11, Motion to Stay, 2dDCA, 2[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [5.6 MB]
ORDER, Granted, Appellant to file Amended Initial Brief
April 8, 2011
2011, 04-08-11, ORDER, Granted appellant[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [66.8 KB]
Appellees' Response, Appellant's Amended Initial Brief
April 5, 2011
2011, 04-05-11, Appellees' response, App[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [99.6 KB]
Appellant's Motion File Amended Initial Brief
April 1, 2011
2011, 04-01-11, Appellant's Motion File [...]
Adobe Acrobat document [431.8 KB]
Clerk's Response to 2dDCA
April 1, 2011
2011, 04-01-11, Clerk's Response.pdf
Adobe Acrobat document [62.9 KB]
Order, Clerk to respond in 10 days
March 23, 2011
2011, 03-23-2011, ORDER, 2dDCA, 2D10-519[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [67.5 KB]
Appellant’s Motion to File Amended Initial Brief
March 17, 2011
2011, 03-17-11, Appellant's motion for l[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [110.2 KB]
Appellant’s Motion to Compel the 13th Circuit, Judge Barton, file communication in case with Clerk
March 17, 2011
2011, 03-17-11, Appellant's Motion To Co[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [589.0 KB]
Appellant's Motion to Compel Clerk, correct Index
March 17, 2011
2011, 03-17-11, Appellant's Motion To Co[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [274.9 KB]
02-17-11, ORDER, 30 day extension, prepare record
2011, 02-17-11, ORDER, 30 day extension,[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [65.6 KB]
02-14-11, Appellees' Answer Brief
2011, 02-14-11, Appellees' Answer Brief.[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [2.9 MB]
02-07-11, Appellant's Initial Brief
2011, 02-07-11, Appellant's Initial Brie[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [2.5 MB]
02-03-11, Appellant's Motion Extension of Time, Index
2011, 02-03-11, Appellant's Motion for E[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [1.1 MB]
02-03-11, ORDER, denied Appellant's motion as moot
2011, 02-03-11, ORDER, denied Appellant'[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [75.3 KB]
02-01-11, Plaintiff/Appellant's motion to Clerk of lower court, prepare and transmit record
The Clerk of the lower court mistakenly sent this motion to the 2dDCA
gillespie.pdf
Adobe Acrobat document [26.4 KB]
01-07-11, ORDER, granting 30 day extension
2011, 01-07-11, ORDER, granting 30 day e[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [38.1 KB]
12-31-10, Appellant's Motion For Extension of Time
2010, 12-31-10, Appellant's Motion For E[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [667.4 KB]
11-22-10, Order, fee not required
2010, 11-22-10, Order, fee not required.[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [31.1 KB]
11-01-10, Acknowledgment of New Case
2010, 11-01-10, Acknowledgment of New Ca[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [40.9 KB]
10-22-10, Notice of Appeal
2010, 10-22-10, Notice of Appeal.pdf
Adobe Acrobat document [707.0 KB]

Jenkins v. State of Florida, 1980, per curiam affirmed decisions have no appeal to Florida Supreme Court

Jenkins v. State of Florida, 1980, per curiam affirmed decisions have no appeal to Florida Supreme Court
Jenkins v state of Florida, PCA composit[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [275.7 KB]

Professionalism and Litigation Ethics

28 STETSON L. REV. 323

Professionalism and Litigation Ethics, 28 STETSON L. REV. 323
28 STETSON L. REV. 323, Westlaw.pdf
Adobe Acrobat document [33.8 KB]

Judge Isom law review, Professionalism and Litigation Ethics, 28 STETSON L. REV. 323 (1998)


"the appellate courts will sustain the trial court's authority if it is exercised in a procedurally correct manner" (page 2, paragraph 1)

2DCA Case No. 2D07-4530, Petition for Writ of Certiotari

 

This appeal is closed. The documents are for reference.

Petition for Writ of Certiotari, Rodems Sep-26-07
2007, 09-26-07, Petition for Writ of Cer[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [1.4 MB]
Response to Petition for Writ of Certiotari, Bauer Nov-13-07
2007, 11-13-07, Response to Petition for[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [2.0 MB]
Motion for Oral Argument, Bauer Nov-14-07
2007, 11-14-07, Request for Oral Argumen[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [342.6 KB]
Petitioners Reply, Rodems Nov-20-07
2007, 11-20-07, Petitioners' Reply, Rode[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [2.0 MB]
Motion for Oral Argument Denied Nov-28-07
2007, 11-28-07, Motion for Oral Argument[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [272.6 KB]
Order, 2DCA Rodems Petition for Writ of Certiotari DENIED Feb-08-08
2008, 02-08-08, Order, 2DCA, Rodems cert[...]
Adobe Acrobat document [35.6 KB]
Docket, Petition for Writ of Certiotari, case no. 2D07-4530
2DCA, Case Number 2D07-4530.pdf
Adobe Acrobat document [31.3 KB]