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!"

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.

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

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 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

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

Counsel for Robert W. Bauer

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

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.

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) 

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."

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

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).

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. 

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.

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 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 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

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

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

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.

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

Mr. Thomas D. Hall
Clerk of the Court

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

James R. Birkhold
Clerk of the Court 

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

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. 

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.

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

James R. Birkhold
Clerk of the Court


This appeal is closed. The documents are for reference.