Pat Frank Clerk Ethics Complaint-Jan-30-2014

DATE FILED
MAR 12 2014
BEFORETHE
STATEOFFLORIDA
COMMISSION ON ETHICS
COMMISSIONONETHICS
Inre PATFRANK, )
) ComplaintNo. 14-015
Respondent. )
----------)
PUBLICREPORTANDORDERDISMISSINGCOMPLAINT
On Friday, March 7, 2014, the Commission on Ethics met in executive session and
considered this complaint for legal sufficiency pursuant to Commission Rule 34-5.002, F.A.C.
The reVIew was limitedto questions of jurisdictionof the COITffilission and of the
adequacy ofthe details ofthe complaint to allege a violation ofthe Code ofEthics for Public
Officers and Employees. No factual investigation preceded the review, and therefore the
Commission'sconclusionsdonotreflectontheaccuracyoftheallegationsofthecomplaint.
The Commission voted to dismiss the complaint for lack oflegal sufficiency, based on
thefollowinganalysis:
1. Thiscomplaintwasfiled byNeilJ. GillespieofOcala,Florida.
2. TheRespondent, PatFrank, servesasClerkofthe CircuitCourtfor Hillsborough
County.
3. The complaint apparently alleges that the Respondent, as Court Clerk, misused
herpublicpositionbycorruptly conspiringwithothers inherofficeto deprive the Complainant
of his legal rights by complying with a "sham" judicial Order Prohibiting Plaintiff from
Appearing Pro Se and also by using the Respondent's public position and resources within her
trust to secure a special privilege, benefit, or exemption for an individual who allegedly filed
with the Florida Bar a "vexatious" Unlicensed Practice of Law complaint against the
Complainant.
4. The only provision of the Code of Ethics possibly implicated by the allegation is
Section 113.313(6), Florida Statutes, which states:
MISUSE OF PUBLIC POSITION.--No public officer, employee of an
agency, or local government attorney shall corruptly use or attempt to use his or
her official position or any property or resource which may be within his or her
trust, or perform his or her official duties, to secure a special privilege, benefit, or
exemption for himself, herself, or others.
Pursuant to Section 112.312(9), Florida Statutes, "corruptly" is defined as
... done with a wrongful intent and for the purpose of obtaining, or compensating
or receiving compensation for, any benefit resulting from some act or omission of
a public servant which is inconsistent with the proper performance of his or her
public duties.
Section 112.313(6) prohibits public officials and employees from corruptly using or attempting
to use their official positions or property or resources within their trust, and it prohibits them
from corruptly performing their official duties, in order to secure a special privilege, benefit, or
exemption for themselves or another.
5. The complaint fails to state a violation of Section 112.313(6) because the
allegations that the Respondent corruptly conspired to deprive the Complainant of his legal rights
and that the Respondent used her public position and resources within her trust to secure a
special benefit for an individual who allegedly filed a Florida Bar complaint against the
Complainant are speculative and conclusory and, therefore, insufficient to indicate a violation of
Section 112.313(6). Also, although the Complainant presumably suffered a detriment as a result
of the alleged Order Prohibiting Plaintiff from Appearing Pro Se, the complaint fails to allege in
2
a factual manner any privilege, benefit, or exemption to the Respondent or anyone else, as
requiredunderthestatute.
Accordingly, this complaint is hereby dismissed for failure to constitute a legally
sufficientcomplaintwitlltheissuanceof thispublicreport.
ORDERED bythe State ofFloridaCommissiononEthics meeting inexecutive session
onMarch7,2014.
12/ 'z'D/c/
DateRendered
MORGANR. BENTLEY
Chair, Florida Commission on Ethics
MRBlbd
cc: Ms.PatFrank,Respondent
Mr. NeilJ. Gillespie,Complainant
3
DATE FILED
BEFORE THE
STATE OF FLORIDA MAR 12
COMMISSION ONETHICS
In re DALE KENT BOHNER, )
) Complaint No. 14-016
Respondent. )
----------)
PUBLIC REPORT AND ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT
On Friday, March 7, 2014, the Commission on Ethics met in executive session and
considered this complaint for legal sufficiency pursuant to Commission Rule 34-5.002, F.A.C.
The reviGw limited to questions of jurisdiction of the Commission and of the
adequacy of the details of the complaint to allege a violation of the Code of Ethics for Public
Officers and Employees. No factual investigation preceded the review, and therefore tIle
Commission's conclusions do not reflect on the accuracy of the allegations of the complaint.
The Commission voted to dismiss the complaint for lack of legal sufficiency, based on
the following analysis:
1. This complaint was filed by Neil J. Gillespie of Ocala, 'Florida.
2. The Respondent, Dale Kent Bohner, allegedly serves as Counsel to the Clerk of
the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County.
3. The complaint apparently alleges tllat the Respondent, as Counsel to the Court
Clerk, misused his public position by corruptly conspiring with others in his office to deprive the
Complainant of his legal rights by complying with a "sham" judicial Order Prohibiting Plaintiff
from Appearing Pro Se and also by using the Respondent's public position and resources within
his trust to secure a special privilege, benefit, or exemption for an individual who allegedly filed
with the Florida Bar a "vexatious" Unlicensed Practice of Law complaint against the
Complainant.
4. TheonlyprovisionoftheCodeofEthicspossiblyimplicatedbytheallegationis
Section 113.313(6),FloridaStatutes,whichstates:
MISUSE OF PUBLIC POSITION.--No public officer, employee of an
agency, orlocal government attorney shall corruptlyuse orattempt to use his or
herofficial position oranyproperty orresource which may be within his orher
trust, orperformhis orherofficialduties, to secureaspecialprivilege,benefit, or
exemptionforhimself,herself,orothers.
PursuanttoSection 112.312(9),FloridaStatutes, "corruptly"isdefinedas
...donewithawrongfulintentandforthepurposeofobtaining,orcompensating
orreceivingcompensationfor, anybenefitresultingfrom someactoromissionof
a public servant which is inconsistent with the proper performance ofhis orher
publicduties.
Section 112.313(6) prohibits public officials and employees from corruptly using or attempting
to use their official positions or property or resources within their trust, and it prohibits them
from corruptlyperforming theirofficial duties, in orderto secure a special privilege,benefit, or
exemptionforthemselvesoranother.
5. The complaint fails to state a violation of Section 112.313(6) because the
allegationsthattheRespondentcorruptlyconspiredtodeprivetheComplainantofhislegalrights
andthattheRespondentusedhispublicpositionandresourceswithinhistrustto secureaspecial
benefit for an individual who allegedly filed a FloridaBar complaint against the Complainant
are speculative and conclusory and, therefore, insufficient to indicate a violation of Section
112.313(6). Also, although the Complainantpresumablysuffered adetriment as aresult ofthe
alleged Order Prohibiting Plaintiff from Appearing Pro Se, the complaint fails to allege in a
2
factualmanneranyprivilege,benefit,orexemptiontotheRespondentoranyoneelse,asrequired
underthestatute.
Accordingly, this complaint is hereby dismissed for failure to constitute a legally
sufficientcomplaintwiththeissuanceof thispublicreport.
ORDERED bythe State ofFloridaCommissiononEthics meeting inexecutive session
onMarch7, 2014.
DateRendered
Chair, Florida Commission on Ethics
MRB/bd
cc: Mr. DaleKentBohner,Respondent
Mr.NeilJ. Gillespie,Complainant
3

.,
'
'
TALLAHASSEE FL 323
C
..... .... -t(J).

..J
o
"-

(Jj
a:
u::
FROM:
STATE OF FLORIDA
325 JOHN KNOX ROAD, BUILDING E, SUITE 200
P.O. DRAWER 15709
TALLAHASSEE, FL 323175709
TO:
NEIL GILLESPIE
8092 SW 115TH LOOP
OCALA, FL 34481
1/1' IiJ Ii,jii'i' jl jli1'1II
i
;i jjiliIJiJi I; dj11
'
jlJlijJJliiljJji,;
3448i ::::;i567
MorganR. Bentley
CI'air
LindaMcKeeRobison
Vice Cllair
MichelleAnchors
MatthewF.Carlucci
I.MartinFord
TomFreeman
SusanHorovitzMaurer
StanleyM.Weston
StateofFlorida
COMMISSIONONETIDCS
P.O.Drawer15709
Tallahassee,Florida32317-5709
325JohnKnoxRoad
BuildingE,Suite200
Tallahassee,Florida32303
"A Public Office is a Public Trust"
January30,2014
VirlindiaDoss
Executive Director
C.ChristopherAnderson,III
General CounseV
Deputy Executive Director
(850)488-7864Phone
(850)488-3077(FAX)
www.ethics.state.fl.us
CERTIFIEDMAIL
RETURNRECEIPTREQUESTED
TheHonorablePatFrank
601 E. KennedyBlvd., 13
th
Floor
Tampa,FL 33602
Confidential
RE: ComplaintNo. 14-015,InrePATFRANK
DearMs. Frank:
Theabove-captionedcomplaint,recentlyreceivedintheofficeof theCommissiononEthics,is
beingtransmittedtoyoupursuanttotherequirementsofSection112.324,FloridaStatutes. This
officewillforwardallfuture correspondenceinthismattertoyouattheabove-listedmailing
addressunlessotherwisenotifiedof achangeinyouraddress. Thistransmittalisaroutine
administrativerequirementwhichshouldnotbeconstruedasanapproval,disapproval,or
judgmentofthecomplaint,eitherastoitsterminologyormerits. Additionalreferenced
documentsareretainedintheCommissionfilesandareavailabletoyouuponrequest.
Pleasenotethatthiscomplaint,aswellasallof theCommission'sproceedingsandrecords
relatingtothecomplaint,remainconfidentialeitheruntilyoumakeawrittenrequesttothe
Commissionthatsuchrecordsbemadepublicoruntilthecomplaintreachesastageinthe
Commission'sproceedingswhereitbecomespublic. Unlesswereceiveawrittenwaiverof
confidentialityfromyou, ourofficeisnotfreetoreleaseanydocumentsortocommentonthis
complainttomembersof thepublicorthepress,solongasthecomplaintremainsina
confidentialstage. TheCommission'sproceduresonconfidentialitydonotgoverntheactionsof
thecomplainantortherespondent.
Thefollowinginformationissubmittedtoaidyouinunderstandingthereviewthatacomplaint
maygothroughundertheCommission'srules. Thefirststageinourcomplaintprocessisa
determination of whether the allegationsof the complaint arelegally sufficient, that is, whether
theyindicateapossibleviolationof anylawoverwhichtheCommissionhasjurisdiction. If the
complaintisfoundnottobelegallysufficient,theCommissionwillorderthatthecomplaintbe
dismissedwithoutinvestigationandallrecordsrelatingtothecomplaintwillbecomepublicat
thattime.
..
PAT FRANK
Page 2
January 30, 2014
If the complaint is legally sufficient but pertains solely to allegations of errors or omissions in
financial disclosure forms, a determination will be made as to whether the error(s) or
omissions(s) are significant to investigate. If the error(s) or omissions(s) are determined to be
minor or inconsequential, you will be so notified and will be given 30 days in which to correct
tIle error(s) or omission(s). If the correction is made, the complaint will be dismissed. Ifno
correction is made, the complaint will advance to the next step in the process.
If the complaint is found to be legally sufficient, a preliminary investigation will be undertaken
by the investigative staff of the Commission. The next stage of the Commission's proceedings
involves the preliminary investigation of the complaint and a decision by the Commission of
whether there is probable cause to believe that there has been a violation of any of the ethics
laws. If the complaint is investigated, you and the complainant will be given an opportunity to
speak with the investigator. You also will be sent a copy of our investigative report prior to any
action by the Commission and will be given the opportunity to respond to the report in writing.
If the Commission finds that there is no probable cause to believe that there has been a violation
of the ethics laws, the complaint will be dismissed and will become public at that time.
If the Commission finds that there is probable cause to believe there has been a violation of the
ethics laws, the complaint becomes public and enters the last stage of proceedings, which
requires that the Commission decide whether the law actually was violated and, if so, whether a
penalty should be recommended. At this stage, you have the right to request a public hearing
(trial) at which evidence would be presented, or the Commission may order that such a hearing
be held. Public hearings usually are held in or near the area where the alleged violation
occurred.
You are entitled to be represented by legal counsel during our proceedings. Upon written
request, documents and notices regarding the complaint will be provided to your attorney.
If you are unfamiliar with the ethics laws and the Commission's responsibilities, I encourage you
to access our website at www.ethics.state.f1.us. where you will find publications, rules, and other
information. If there are any questions concerning this complaint or the procedures being
followed by the Commission, please feel free to contact Ms. Kaye Starling, our Complaint
Coordinator, at (850) 488-7864.
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Neil J. Gillespie, Complainant
MorganR.Bentley
Chair
LindaMcKeeRobison
Vice Chair
MichelleAnchors
MatthewF.Carlucci
I.MartinFord
TomFreeman
SusanHorovitzMaurer
StanleyM.Weston
StateofFlorida
COMMISSIONONETHICS
P.O.Drawer15709
Tallahassee,Florida32317-5709
325JohnKnoxRoad
BuildingE,Suite200
Tallahassee,Florida32303
"A Public Office is a Public Trust"
January30,2014
VirlindiaDoss
Executive Director
c.ChristopherAnderson,III
General CounseV
Deputy Executive Director
(850)488-7864Phone
(850)488-3077(FAX)
www.ethics.state.fl..us
CERTIFIEDMAIL
RETURNRECEIPTREQUESTED
Mr.DaleK. Bohner
th
Floor
Confidential
Tampa,FL 33602
RE: ComplaintNo. 14-016,InreDALEKENTBOHNER
DearMr.Bohner:
Theabove-captionedcomplaint,recentlyreceivedintheofficeof theCommissiononEthics,is
beingtransmittedtoyoupursuanttotherequirementsofSection112.324,FloridaStatutes. This
officewillforward allfuturecorrespondenceinthismattertoyouattheabove-listedmailing
addressunlessotherwisenotifiedof achangeinyouraddress. Thistransmittalisaroutine
administrativerequirementwhichshouldnotbeconstruedasanapproval,disapproval,or
judgmentof thecomplaint,eitherastoitsterminologyormerits. Additionalreferenced
documentsareretainedintheCommissionfiles andareavailabletoyouuponrequest.
Pleasenotethatthiscomplaint,aswellasallof theCommission'sproceedingsaIldrecords
relatingtothecomplaint,remainconfidentialeitheruntilyoumakeawrittenrequesttothe
Commissionthatsuchrecordsbemadepublicoruntilthecomplaintreachesastageinthe
Commission'sproceedingswhereitbecomespublic. Unlesswereceiveawrittenwaiverof
confidentialityfromyou,ourofficeisnotfreetoreleaseanydocumentsortocommentonthis
complainttomembersof thepublicorthepress,solongasthecomplaintremainsina
confidentialstage. TheCommission'sproceduresonconfidentialitydonotgoverntheactionsof
thecomplainantortherespondent.
Thefollowinginformationissubmittedtoaidyouinunderstandingthereviewthatacomplaint
maygothroughundertheCommission'srules. Thefirststageinourcomplaintprocessisa
determinationof whethertheallegationsof thecomplaintarelegallysufficient,thatis,whether
theyindicateapossibleviolationof anylawoverwhichtheCommissionhasjurisdiction. Ifthe
complaintisfoundnotto belegallysufficient,theCommissionwillorderthatthecomplaintbe
dismissedwithoutinvestigationandallrecordsrelatingtothecomplaintwillbecomepublicat
thattime.
DALE KENT BOHNER
Page 2
January 30, 2014
If the complaint is legally sufficient but pertains solely to allegations of errors or omissions in
financial disclosure forms, a determination will be made as to whether the error(s) or
omissions(s) are significant to investigate. If the error(s) or omissions(s) are determined to be
minor or inconsequential, you will be so notified and will be given 30 days in which to correct
the error(s) or omission(s). If the correction is made, the complaint will be dismissed. Ifno
correction is made, the complaint will advance to the next step in the process.
If the complaint is found to be legally sufficient, a preliminary investigation will be undertaken
by the investigative staff of the Commission. The next stage of the Commission's proceedings
involves the preliminary investigation of the complaint and a decision by the Commission of
whether there is probable cause to believe that there has been a violation of any of the ethics
laws. If the complaint is investigated, you and the complainant will be given an opportunity to
speak witll the investigator. You also will be sent a copy of our investigative report prior to any
action by the Commission and will be given the opportunity to respond to the report in writing.
If the Commission finds that there is no probable cause to believe that there has been a violation
of the ethics laws, the complaint will be dismissed and will become public at that time.
If the Commission finds that there is probable cause to believe there has been a violation of the
ethics laws, the complaint becomes public and enters the last stage of proceedings, which
requires that the Commission decide whether the law actually was violated and, if so, whether a
pel1alty should be recommended. At this stage, you have the right to request a public hearing
(trial) at which evidence would be presented, or the Commission may order that such a hearing
be held. Public hearings usually are held in or near the area where the alleged violation
occurred.
You are entitled to be represented by legal counsel during our proceedings. Upon written
request, documents and notices regarding the complaint will be provided to your attorney.
If you are unfamiliar with the ethics laws and the Commission's responsibilities, I encourage you
to access our website at www.ethics.state.fl.us. where you will find publications, rules, and other
information. If there are any questions concerning this complaint or the procedures being
followed by the Commission, please feel free to contact Ms. Kaye Starling, our Complaint
Coordinator, at (850) 488-7864.
Sincerely,

Virlindia Doss
Executive Director
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Neil J. Gillespie, Complainant
VIA UPS No. 1Z64589FP291361933 J anuary 24, 2014
Virlindia A. Doss, Executive Director
Florida Commission on Ethics
325 J ohn Knox Road
Building E, Suite 200
Tallahassee, FL 32303
Dear Ms. Doss:
Please find enclosed two (2) sworn complaints for Misuse of Public Position, 112.313(6) F.S.
for the Honorable Pat Frank, Clerk of the Circuit Court, Hillsborough County, an elected public
officer, and the Clerks counsel Dale Kent Bohner, a local government attorney, in my civil
lawsuit in Hillsborough County, Neil J . Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA, and William J .
Cook, Case No. 05-CA-7205. August 11, 2005 - J une 21, 2011.
Clerk Frank and Mr. Bohner have refused to docket my pro se filings in the case since at least
J uly 11, 2011 as shown below. Clerk Frank and Mr. Bohner claim reliance on an order entered
by J udge Martha Cook November 15, 2010 (enclosed) as the basis of their refusal to docket my
pleadings. This claim is belied by the following:
1. A judge cannot order the clerk of court to do anything absent a legislative mandate. In
civil court, court orders routinely contain language that the clerk is ordered to do so and so
forthwith. Unless the clerk is made a party to the lawsuit, these orders are meaningless. The
Clerk is not a party to case no. 05-CA-7205, thus the order is meaningless.
2. Clerk Frank and Mr. Bohner docketed my pro se filings for almost eight months (8) after
the order was entered November 15, 2010, because the order was meaningless.
3. Opposing counsel Ryan Christopher Rodems wrote Clerk Frank May 31, 2011, in part,
Dear Ms. Frank:
I am counsel for William J . Cook and Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A. in case
number 05-CA-7205.
On November 15, 2010, J udge Cook entered and Order barring the Plaintiff, Neil
J . Gillespie, from appearing pro se, and also directing the Clerks office not to
accept any more filing from Mr. Gillespie. Since that time, the Clerks office has
accepted a number of flings from Mr. Gillespie.
A copy of J udge Cooks Order is enclosed.
Would you please explain why your office has not complied with J udge Cooks
Order?
Respectfully submitted,
Ryan Christopher Rodems
Virlindia A. Doss, Executive Director J anuary 24, 2014
Florida Commission on Ethics Page - 2
Mr. Rodems letter to the Clerk is enclosed.
4. Clerk Frank and Mr. Bohner corruptly conspired to use her and his official position,
property, and resources within her and his trust to secure a special privilege, benefit, or
exemption for Mr. Rodems and Rodems various constituencies, including those who received a
gift of legal services and settlement benefit to state of Florida judges, public officers, public
employees, and my former counsel Robert W. Bauer and his law firm, in my federal disability
and civil rights lawsuit against the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit Florida, case no. 5:10-cv-00503,
Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, Florida
Claudia Rickert Isom, Circuit J udge, and individually
J ames M. Barton, II, Circuit J udge, and individually
Martha J . Cook, Circuit J udge, and individually
David A. Rowland, Court Counsel, and individually
Gonzalo B. Casares, ADA Coordinator, and individually
Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A.
Ryan Christopher Rodems, Attorney at Law (Fla. Bar ID: 947652)
The Law Office of Robert W. Bauer, P.A.
Robert W. Bauer, Attorney at Law (Fla. Bar ID: 11058)
In doing so, Clerk Frank and Mr. Bohner corruptly conspired to use her and his official position,
property, and resources within her and his trust to deny me due process under color of law.
5. Please find enclosed my 64 page affidavit, J une 14, 2013,
AFFIDAVIT OF NEIL J. GILLESPIE ON JUDGE MARTHA J. COOKS
Order Prohibiting Plaintiff from Appearing Pro Se [A Sham Order]
that begins as follows,
1. My name is Neil J . Gillespie. I am over 18 years old. I was the Plaintiff and Counter-
Defendant in the above-captioned case in Hillsborough County, Thirteenth J udicial
Circuit. (hereinafter this case). This affidavit is given on personal knowledge unless
otherwise stated.
2. I made this affidavit to impeach the Order Prohibiting Plaintiff from Appearing Pro
Se (the Order), a sham Order entered November 15, 2010 by J udge Martha J . Cook in
this case. (Exhibit 1). The Order is a sham and did not address a bona fide issue. J udge
Cook corruptly entered the Order during a conflict of interest, while she was a Defendant
in my federal disability and civil rights lawsuit. J udge Cook entered the Order with a
corrupt motive, to stop legitimate inquiry showing her personal and business financial
affairs violated the Florida Code of J udicial Conduct. J udge Cook recused herself in this
case November 18, 2010, three days after entering the Order. J udge Cooks recusal
shows my motion to disqualify her was legally justified.
3. On May 1, 2013 Ryan Christopher Rodems submitted the sham Order, under penalty
of perjury, in his vexatious Unlicensed Practice of Law (UPL) complaint against me to
The Florida Bar, case 20133090(5) for representing myself and my related interest pro se
in other cases.
6. In J une 2011 appointment of counsel was, on information and belief, required under 18
U.S.C. 3006A, and the Sixth Amendment, after Mr. Rodems corruptly obtained a
warrant for my arrest through honest services fraud with J udge Cook, who accepted
things of value (campaign donations) in return for official acts [18 U.S.C. 201(b)(2)],
improper rulings on summary judgment, and civil contempt with arrest on writ of bodily
attachment, and who used the mail to carry out a scheme or artifice to defraud me [18
U.S.C. 1341] of the intangible right of honest services. [18 U.S.C. 1346]. See U.S.
v. Terry, No. 11-4130, C.A.6.
6. Clerk Frank and Mr. Bohner corruptly conspired to use her and his official position,
property, and resources within her and his trust to secure a special privilege, benefit, or
exemption for Mr. Rodems and Rodems various constituencies named in paragraph 4, to,
A. Clerks letter (unsigned) dated J uly 11, 2011, 7 pages enclosed,
Mr. Gillespie:
RE: Case #05-CA-7205
This office is returning the following pleadings pursuant to the attached court order
signed on November 15, 2010:
1. Letter to clerk dated J uly 6, 2011.
2. Plaintiff's Motion to Strike or Set Aside J oint Stipulation for Dismissal with Prejudice
and Plaintiff's Motion to Strike or Set Aside Settlement Agreement.
and Plaintiff's Motion to Strike or Set Aside Settlement Agreement. Appendix 1.
and Plaintiff's Motion to Strike or Set Aside Settlement Agreement. Appendix 2.
Thank you,
Clerk Of Circuit Court
Circuit Civil Division
Hillsborough County, Florida
B. Clerks letter dated September 22, 2011, signed by J ohn Richardson (?) 6 pages enclosed,
Mr. Gillespie:
This office is returning the following pleadings pursuant to the attached court order
signed on November 15, 2010:
1. Motion to Amend and Correct - Affidavit and Inventory of Personal Property
of Neil J . Gillespie and Designated Exemptions.
This was part of my effort to get back approximately $600 that Mr. Rodems wrongly garnished
from my bank account in 2008. I eventually got the money back directly from the Park Avenue
Bank (PAB) of Georgia shortly before it failed. PAB had not sent the money to the Clerk.
C. Docket entries,
07/13/2011 DO NOT ENTER ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS USER ID=RICKERSJ
01/17/2012 DO NOT ENTER ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS PER D. BOHNER, LEGAL
ADVISOR TO CLERK (PER COURT ORDER DATED 11/15/10)
Docket page 22 printed today J anuary 24, 2014 shows the above entries, and is enclosed.
D. APPELLANTS MOTION TO AMEND NOTICE OF APPEAL
Case No.: 2D10-5197
Lower Court Case No. 05-CA-007205
J uly 18, 2011
The 20 page motion is enclosed. I believe 10 is relevant here, and the cited case law,
10. For almost eight (8) months the Clerk of the Circuit Court did not comply with J udge
Cooks Order Prohibiting Plaintiff From Appearing Pro Se and accepted Gillespies
filings. (Exhibit 3). However in a letter dated J uly 11, 2011 (received by Gillespie J uly
14, 2011) the Clerk returned Gillespies filings submitted J uly 6, 2011 and filed J uly 7,
2011. (Exhibit 5). The Clerk even struck her own filed stamp. The Clerk returned
Gillespies Motion to Strike or Set Aside J oint Stipulation For Dismissal With Prejudice,
and Motion to Strike or Set Aside Settlement Agreement. (Exhibit 5). A pleading in a
cause after filing becomes a part of the record and should not be altered, amended, or
destroyed without permission of the court, on due notice to the opposite party, and should
be kept by the clerk in files of his office. Gracy v. Fielding, 83 Fla. 388, 91 So. 373.
Appellant did not receive notice that his pleading would be struck by the Clerk after the
Clerk filed the pleading J uly 7, 2011. The Clerk has a legal duty to maintain and to
provide access to the records contained in its files unless the records are legally exempt
from disclosure. Radford v. Brock, App. 2 Dist., 914 So.2d 1066 (2005). The Clerk has
failed her duty to maintain the file in this case.
7. The following from my affidavit to impeach J udge Cooks sham order is relevant,
53. I am a consumer of legal and court services affecting interstate commerce in this case.
54. I commenced this lawsuit August 11, 2005 by filing the Complaint and paying a
$255 filing fee, in cash, to the Clerk of the Court. I paid an additional $40 cash August
11, 2005 to the Hillsborough County Sheriff to serve the Complaint on the Defendants.
55. The Circuit Court of the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, in and for Hillsborough County,
Florida, is a court created by statute to administer, apply, and interpret the laws of the
state of Florida in a fair and unbiased manner without favoritism, extortion, improper
influence, personal self-enrichment, self-dealing, concealment, and conflict of interest.
56. Martha J ean Cook is an elected judge for the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, and was by
virtue of that position of trust an officer and employee of state government, responsible
for lawfully performing and discharging her duties without bias, favoritism, extortion,
improper influence, personal self enrichment, self-dealing, concealment, and conflict of
interest.
56. As shown in this affidavit, J udge Cook did not lawfully perform and discharge her
duties, but served as Mr. Rodems marionette as that term is used in U.S. v. Terry, No.
11-4130, U.S. Sixth Circuit, which affirmed a jury conviction against former J udge
Steven J . Terry of several honest services fraud violations, citing federal anti-corruption
statutes, one of which prohibits an official from accepting things of value in return for
official acts. 18 U.S.C. 201(b)(2).
8. In a letter to Mr. Bohner August 30, 2013 I notified the Clerk of errors and omissions
with the docket in 05-CA-7205, copy enclosed without attachments. I specifically pointed out
that J udge Cooks order entered November 15, 2010 was a sham, and should not be relied upon.
I also requested pursuant to Rule 2.430(g), Fla.R.J ud.Adnlin., the file in Neil J . Gillespie vs.
Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA et al case no. 05-CA-007205 be surrendered to me prior to it being
destroyed in accordance with regular destruction schedules.
9. Mr. Bohner replied by letter dated September 12, 2013, copy enclosed. Relevant to this
complaint, he wrote,
5. You are entitled to apply to the Court for an order requiring the Clerk to deliver to you
the court records that are to be destroyed or disposed of under Rule 2.430(g). The Clerk
will obey the directions in such an order.
6. I have reviewed your position. If the referenced order is superseded by another order,
the Clerk will follow the directions contained in such an order.
I take this to mean Clerk Frank and Mr. Bohner corruptly conspired to use their official position,
property, and resources within her and his trust to deny me due process under color of law.
10. In a letter to Mr. Bohner J anuary 7, 2014 I notified the Clerk in part,
It has come to my attention that your attached letter September 12, 2013 is not correct,
6. I have reviewed your position. If the referenced order is superseded by another
order, the Clerk will follow the directions contained in such an order.
and this docket entry in not correct or valid,
01/17/2012, DO NOT ENTER ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS PER D.
BOHNER, LEGAL ADVISOR TO CLERK (PER COURT ORDER DATED
11/15/10
Take notice that the order by Martha Cook, Order Prohibiting Plaintiff from Appearing
Pro Se, is not a legitimate order, but a sham order corruptly entered.
Nonetheless, the fact that the legislature cannot set a judge's vacation days brings up a
parallel and little known corollary: A judge cannot order the clerk of court to do anything
absent a legislative mandate. In civil court, court orders routinely contain language that
the clerk is ordered to do so and so forthwith. Unless the clerk is made a party to the
lawsuit, these orders are meaningless.
The Clerk is not a party to case no. 05-CA-7205, thus the order is meaningless. So you
may immediately remove from the docket Do Not Enter Additional Documents.
Previously pursuant to Rule 2.430(g), Fla.R.J ud.Admin., I requested the file in Neil J .
Gillespie vs. Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA et al case no. 05-CA-007205 be surrendered to
me prior to it being destroyed in accordance with regular destruction schedules. I now
believe that procedure is not correct. Pursuant to Rule 2.430(g) I may apply for an order:
Rule 2.430(g) Disposition Other Than Destruction. Before destruction or
disposition of court records under this rule, any person may apply to the court for
an order requiring the clerk to deliver to the applicant the court records that are to
be destroyed or disposed of. All parties shall be given notice of the application.
The court shall dispose of that court record as appropriate.
I am a consumer of legal and court services affecting interstate commerce in this case.
I commenced this lawsuit August 11, 2005 by filing the Complaint and paying a $255
filing fee, in cash, to the Clerk of the Court. I paid an additional $40 cash August 11,
2005 to the Hillsborough County Sheriff to serve the Complaint on the Defendants.
The Circuit Court of the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, in and for Hillsborough County,
Pat Frank was elected Clerk of the Court and is by virtue of that public position of trust
an officer of state government responsible for lawfully performing and discharging her
duties without bias, favoritism, extortion, improper influence, personal self enrichment,
self-dealing, concealment, and conflict of interest.
On information an belief, Clerk of Court Pat Frank, and you as counsel, are subject to
112.313(6) F.S., Misuse of Public Position:
112.313 Standards of conduct for public officers, employees of agencies, and
local government attorneys.
(6) MISUSE OF PUBLIC POSITION.No public officer, employee of an
exemption for himself, herself, or others. This section shall not be construed to
conflict with s. 104.31.
Also see 760.51 F.S., Violations of constitutional rights, civil action by the Attorney
General; civil penalty. Please take notice that A Public Office is a Public Trust.
My letter is enclosed.
11. Mr. Bohner responded by letter dated J anuary 14, 2014,
This letter will acknowledge receipt of your letter to me dated J anuary 7, 2014. I
have read the position you take in your letter. If you apply to the Court for an
order under Rule 2.430(g) requiring the Clerk to deliver the court records that are
to be destroyed or disposed of in Case 05-CA-007205, the Clerk will follow the
directions of the Court. Your application, when filed, will be forwarded to the
Court for consideration.
12. As of today, the following docket entries remain,
07/13/2011 DO NOT ENTER ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS USER ID=RICKERSJ
01/17/2012 DO NOT ENTER ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS PER D. BOHNER, LEGAL
ADVISOR TO CLERK (PER COURT ORDER DATED 11/15/10)
Docket page 22 printed today J anuary 24, 2014 shows the above entries, and is enclosed.
Conclusion
Clerk Frank and Mr. Bohner corruptly conspired to use her and his official position, property,
and resources within her and his trust to secure a special privilege, benefit, or exemption for Mr.
Rodems and Rodems various constituencies, including those who received a gift of legal
services and settlement benefit to state of Florida judges, public officers, public employees, and
my former counsel Robert W. Bauer and his law firm, in my federal disability and civil rights
lawsuit against the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit Florida, case no. 5:10-cv-00503, while corruptly
denying me a due process right of filing pleadings under color of law.
Virlindia A. Doss, Executive Director January 24, 2014
F'lorida Commission on Ethics Page - 8
Thank you for your consideration of my complaint. Under penalty of perjury, I declare the
foregoing facts are true, correct, and complete.

,/ ,
1J. Gillespi
092 SW 115t Loop
Ocala, Florida 34481
Telephone: 352-854-7807
En1ail: neilgillespie@mfi.net
Enclosures:
1. Ethics Complaint for the Hon. Pat Frank, Clerk of the Circuit Court, Hillsborough Co.
2. Ethics Complaint for Dale Kent Bohner, Counel to the Clerk of the Circuit Court
3. Page 22 from docket 05-CA-7205, Jan-24-2014
4. Mr. Rodems May 31, 2011 letter to Clerk of the Circuit Court Pat Frank
5. Order of Judge Cook, November 15,2010
6. Clerk's letter July 11,2011 to NJG, pleadings returned per court order signed Nov-15-2010
7. Clerk's letter Sep-22, 2011 to NJG, pleadings returned per court order signed Nov-15-2010
8. Motion to Amend Notice of AppeaI2DI0-5197, July 18,2011
9. Letter August 30,2013 of Gillespie to Dale Bohner, counsel to Clerk Pat Frank
10. Dale Bohner counsel to Clerk Pat Frank letter September 12, 2013 response to Gillespie
11. Letter January 7,2014 Gillespie to Dale Bohner, counsel to Clerk Pat Frank
12. Dale Bohner counsel to Clerk Pat Frank letter January 14, 2014 response to G-illespie
AFFIDAVIT OF NEIL J. GILLESPIE ON JUDGE MARTHA J. COOK'S
Order Prohibiting Plaintifffrom Appearing Pro Se [A Sham Order]
Also enclosed is Judge Who Would Not Conform [to corruption] that I referenced in the past.
------------------------------------
lSi" , uQ&Cl
i.: \ CommIsaIon#EE191610
: l. expiresJune6. 2016
STATEOFFLORIDA
COMMISSIONONETHICS
P. O. DRAWER15709,TALLAHASSEE,FLORIDA 32317-5709
COMPLAINT
1. PERSON BRINGING COMPLAINT:
352-854-7807
8092SW115th Loop
ress: _
Add
C
Ot Ocala C t Marion Z C d 34481
1 y: oun y: Ip 0 e:
2. PERSON AGAINST WHOM COMPLAINT IS BROUGHT:
Currentor publicofficer,public candidate,orlobbyist- pleaseuseone
foreachpersonyouwish to against:
l\.T PatFrank rr I h l\.T b 813-276-8100
1. e ep one er:
Address:601 E. KennedyBlvd., 13th Floor
C
t Tampa C t Hillsborough County Z C d 33602
1 y: oun y: Ip 0 e:
Titleof officeorpositionheldorsought: ClerkoftheCircuitCourt, HillsboroughCountyFlorida
3. STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Please explain your fully, either on the reverse side of this or on additional sheets,
providinga detailed description ofthe facts and the actions ofthe person above. Include relevant
dates and the and addresses ofpersons you believe be witnesses. Ifyou believe that a
particular provision ofArticle II, Section 8, Florida Constitution (the Sunshine or ofPart
III, Chapter 112, Florida Statutes (the Code of Ethics for Public Officers and has been
violated, please state thespecific section(s). Pleasedo notattach copies oflengthy iftheyare
relevant,yourdescriptionof willsuffice. Also, pleasedonot videotapesoraudiotapes.
4. OATH
OFFLORIDA
OF (V\ Ar; 0 Yl

(oraffirmed) andsubscribedbeforeme
I, the person bringing this do this ;;t3 r dayof J'/tnLlArL.( ,
depose on oath or and say that
20 ,Lf by tV e.; I s: G If s jJ"e
,
thefacts setforth in theforegoingcomplaint (nameof personmakingstatement)

and theretoaretrueandcorrect
(Signature0 . ... R
tothebest knowledgeandbelief.
(Print,Type,or
PersonallyKnown ORProducedIdentification__
TypeofIdentificationProduced:
CE FORM 50-EFF.4/2008
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
STATEOFFLORIDA
COMMISSIONONETHICS
P.O.DRAWER15709,TALLAHASSEE,FLORIDA 82817-5709
COMPLAINT
1. PERSON BRINGING COMPLAINT:
Neil J. Gillespie T 1 h N b 352-854-7807
N
arne: e ep one urn er: _
Address:8092SW115thLoop
C
't Ocala C t Marion Z C d 34481
1 y: oun y: Ip 0 e: _
2. PERSON AGAINST WHOM COMPLAINT IS BROUGHT:
Currentorformerpublicofficer,publicemployee,candidate,orlobbyist- pleaseuseonecomplaintform
foreachpersonyouwishtocomplainagainst:
Dale KentBohner T 1 h N b 813-276-8100
N
arne: e ep one urn er: _
Address:601 E. KennedyBlvd., 13thFloor
City:Tampa
HillsboroughCounty Z C d 33602
C
oun
t
y: Ip 0 e: _
Titleof officeorpositionheldorsought: CounseltoClerkoftheCircuitCourt, Hillsborough CountyFlorida
3. STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Please explain your complaint fully, either on the reverse side of this form or on additional sheets,
providinga detailed description ofthe facts and the actions oftheperson named above. Include relevant
dates and the names and addresses ofpersons whom you believe may be witnesses. Ifyou believe that a
particular provision ofArticle II, Section 8, Florida Constitution (the Sunshine Amendment) or ofPart
III, Chapter 112, Florida Statutes (the Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees) has been
violated, please statethespecific section(s). Pleasedo notattachcopies oflengthydocuments; iftheyare
relevant,yourdescriptionofthemwill suffice. Also,pleasedonotsubmitvideotapesoraudiotapes.
STATEOFFLORIDA
COUNTYOF ....... .. .=...O...:...h....:.._
4. OATH
C.....;....t _
Swornto(oraffirmed) andsubscribedbeforeme
I, the person bringing this complaint, do this ;;<. 3 r:-- dayof :JAnLU4-ry ,
depose on oath or affirmation and say that
20 I Lf ,by 1 J:Gi JI e 5 fJ i e
thefacts setforth in theforegoingcomplaint _ (nameofpersonmakingstatement)
andattachmentstheretoaretrueandcorrect

(Signatureof NotaryPublic- StateOkida)
tothebestofmyknowledgeandbelief.
CEFORM50-EFF.4/2008
(Print,Type,or ic)
06/21/2011

ORDER ON - TO - FOR
RESCINDING WRIT OF BODILY ATTACHMENT. 6/21/11 JDA. USER ID=HEALY
06/24/2011

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL
W/PREJ. USER ID=HEALY
Party: GILLESPIE, NEIL J
06/24/2011

Party: COOK, WILLIAM J
06/24/2011

Party: BARKER RODEMS & COOK PA
06/27/2011

CONVERTED EVENT
CLOSE - CASE STATUS UPDATED. USER ID=RODRIGZ
06/27/2011

ORDER FROM 2ND DCA
06-23-11 : APPELLANT'S MOTION TO FILE AMENDED INITIAL BRIEF IS GRANTED. THE BRIEF SHALL BE SERVED BY JULY 6, 2011.
2D10-5197. EM. USER ID=MANRESAE
06/27/2011

ORDER FROM 2ND DCA
06-24-11 : PURSUANT TO THE NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL FILED HEREIN, THIS APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 2D10-5197. EM. USER
ID=MANRESAE
07/11/2011

CONVERTED EVENT
C176 - LETTER TO. NEIL GILLESPIE FROM CLERK. USER ID=HEALY
07/12/2011

CONVERTED EVENT
CLOSE - CASE STATUS UPDATED. USER ID=RODRIGZ
07/12/2011

ORDER FROM 2ND DCA
07-11-11 : APPELLEES ARE DIRECTED TO RESPOND WITHIN 12 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ORDER TO APPELLANT'S MOTION TO
REINSTATE DISMISSED APPEAL. 2D10-5197. EM. USER ID=MANRESAE
07/13/2011

DO NOT ENTER ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS
USER ID=RICKERSJ
07/28/2011

ORDER FROM 2ND DCA
07-26-11 : THE APPELLANT'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SUBMIT REPLY TO APPELLEE'S RESPONSE IS DENIED. THE APPELLANT'S
MOTION TO REINSTATE DISMISSED APPEAL IS DENIED. THE APPELLANT'S MOTION TO AMEND NOTICE OF APPEAL IS DENIED AS
MOOT. 2D10-5197. EM. USER ID=MANRESAE
08/24/2011

ORDER FROM SUPREME COURT
SUPREME COURT ORDER: 08-22-11 : 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. 2D10-5197, SC11-1622. EM. USER ID=MANRESAE
09/22/2011

CONVERTED EVENT
C176 - LETTER TO. NEIL J. GILLESPIE - RETURNING - MOTION TO AMEND AND CORRECT..... PURSUANT TO COURT ORDER.. USER
ID=HEALY
01/12/2012

SEE DOCKET TEXT
CD-ROM filed - reference Florida Supreme Court Appeal (label states, 'Supreme Court of Florida SC11-1622 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems & Cook
01/12/2012

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
(copy) certificate of service filed in Florida Supreme Court appeal SC11-1622 2D10-5197 05-CA-007205
01/12/2012

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
(copy) filed in Florida Supreme Court Appeal SC11-1622 2d10-5197 05-CA-007205
01/17/2012

DO NOT ENTER ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS
PER D. BOHNER, LEGAL ADVISOR TO CLERK (PER COURT ORDER DATED 11/15/10)
03/16/2012

MONDAY, MARCH 12, 2012 SC11-1622; 2D10-5197 THE PETITIONER HAS FILED A PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS WITH THE
COURT. TO THE EXTENT THE PETITIONER SEEKS A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTED TOWARDS THE DISTRICT COURT, THE
PETITION IS DENIED BECAUSE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS CANNOT BE ISSUED TO DIRECT THE MANNER IN WHICH A COURT SHALL
ACT IN LAWFUL EXERCISE OF ITS JURISDICTION. STATE EX REL. NORTH ST. LUCIE RIVER DRAINAGE DIST. V KANNER, 11 SO. 2D
889, 890 (FLA. 1943); SEE ALSO MIGLIORE V. CITY OF LAUDERHILL, 415 SO. 2D 62, 63 (FLA. 4TH DCA 1982) (STATING THAT MANDAMUS
"IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE VEHICLE FOR REVIEW OF A MERELY ERRONEOUS DECISION NOR IS IT PROPER TO MANDATE THE
DOING (OR UNDOING) OF A DISCRETIONARY ACT"), APPROVED, 431 SO. 2D 986 (FLA. 1983). TO THE EXTENT THE PETITIONER
SEEKS ANY ADDITIONAL RELIEF, THE PETITION IS DISMISSED AS FACIALLY INSUFFICIENT PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, LABARGA
AND PERRY,JJ., CONCUR. SIGNED BY THOMAS D. HALL CLERK, SUPEREME COURT
03/23/2012

COPY OF
PETITIONER'S MOTION FORLEAVE TO FILE A PROPER MOTION FOR RECCONSIDERATON ON SINGLE ISSUE
03/26/2012

COPY OF
ADDENDUM REQUEST TO TOLL TIME, AMENDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE.
Party: GILLESPIE, NEIL J
05/29/2012

5/22/12, SC11-1622
09/23/2013

ORDER FROM DCA
9/20/13 2D11-2127, 2D10-5529, 2D10-5197, 2D08-2224, 2D07-4530, 2D06-3803, NOT CONSOLIDATED
12/11/2013

ORDER FROM DCA
12/10/13 2D10-5197
http://pubrec10.hillsclerk.com/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=2143026
1/24/2014 1:53 PM 22 of 24
copy
BARKER,RODEMS& COOK
PROFESSIONALASSOCIATrON
ATIORNEYSATlAW
CHRISA BARKER Telephone8 1 3 4 8 9 ~ 1 1
400NorthAshleyDrive,Suite2100
RYANCHRISTOPHERRODEMS
Facsimile 813/489-1008
WILLIAM].COOK Tampa, Florida33602
April26,2011
TheHonorableJamesD. Arnold
CircuitCourtJudge
CircuitCivil,Division"J"
800E. TwiggsStreet,Room514
Tampa,Florida 33602
Re: NeilJ.Gillespiev.Barker,Rodems& Cook,P.A.,
aFloridaCorporation;andWilliamJ.Cook
CaseNo.: 05-CA-7205;Division"J"
DearJudgeArnold:
EnclosedpleasefindacourtesycopyofDefendants'Motionto StrikeProSeFilingsbyPlaintiff
whichwasfiledonevendateintheabove-referencedmatter. ByOrderofthisCourtentered
November15,2010,Mr. Gillespieisprohibitedfromfilinganydocumentsprosee
Thankyouforyourtinleandattentiontothismatter.
Respectfullysubmitted,
RCR/so
Enclosure
cc:NeilJ.Gillespie(w/encl)
19

INTHECIRCUITCOURTOFTHETHIRTEENTHJUDICIALCIRCUIT
OFTHESTATEOFFLORIDA,INAND FORHILLSBOROUGHCOUNTY
GENERALCIVILDIVISION
NEILJ. GILLESPIE, CASEID: 05CA7205
Plaintiff,
v.
BARKER,RODEMS & COOK,P.A., DIVISION: G
aFloridacorporation;and
WILLIAMJ.COOK,
Defendants.
______________,1
ORDERPROHIBITINGPLAINTIFFFROMAPPEARINGPROSE
-':}
.' "'".. '"
THISMATTERis beforethe CourtonDefendants' "motionfor an order
",-
to whyPlaintiffshouldnotbeprohibitedfromhenceforthappearingpro se," filed onJulyQ:9,
"-#
2010. Itis allegedthatPlaintiffis an abusivelitigantwhoshouldnotbepermittedto file further
pleadingsin this causeunlesstheyare firstreviewedandsignedbyan attorneylicensedto
law in this state. DefendantsallegethatPlaintiff'sprosecutionis an affrontto thedignityofthe
judicialsystemand an unacceptableburdenonits resources. OnNovember4,2010,thiscourt
issued the orderto showcausewhyPlaintiffshouldnotbeprohibitedfromappearingpro se.
AmongPlaintiff'sresponsewerehis fourth and fifth attemptstodisqualifythiscourt. This
responseistypicalofPlaintiffslitigationstyle. Andhis continuingcourseofconductinthis case
.is all themoretroublesomebecausethiscaseis presently'pendingappellatereviewofafinal
summaryjudgmentorder. Thereis nothinglefttolitigateatthis time. YetPlaintiffcontinuesto
file spuriouspleadingswith this court,eachofwhichmustbereviewedandevaluatedbymembers
ofthecourtstaff. Forthesereasonsand the reasonsenumeratedin the motion, the Courthereby
finds thatPlaintiffis an abusivelitigantand, inordertopreserveboth thedignityandtheefficient
operationofthejudicialsystem,his rightto full access to thecourtshouldbecurtailedtothe
extentdescribedin this order. Plaintiffis herebyPROHIBITEDfrom filing anypaperwiththis
courtwhichisnotsignedbyan attorneydulylicensedto practicelaw in the StateofFlorida.
1of2
3808
TheCounthereforeORDERSas follows:
1. PlaintiffSHALLCEASEfiling anypleading,correspondence,orotherdocumentin this
caseunless the documentis signedbyan attorneywhois dulylicensed to practicelawin
theStateofFlorida.
2. TheClerkofCourtSHALLREJECTforfiling anydocumentreceivedfromPlaintiff
whichdoesnotbearthe clearandconspicuoussignatureofan attorneydulylicensedto
practicelawin this state.
3. TheClerkofCourtSHALLNOTDOCKETanypleading,correspondenceorother
documentreceivedfrom Plaintiffwhichis prohibitedbythis order.
DONEANDORDEREDinChambersin HillsboroughCounty,Florida,this 15
th
dayof
November,2010.
( /d. '
!il111.VA,eli QiUL
RTHAJ.co , CIrcUItJudge
Sendcopies to:
NeilJ. Gillespie
Plaintiff
8092SW 115
th
Loop
Ocala,FL34481
.
RyanChristopherRodems,Esquire
Attorneyfor Defendant
400NAshleyDrive
Suite2100
Tampa,FL33602
3809
20f2
July11, 2011
NeilJ. Gillespie
8092 SW115
th
Loop
Ocala, FL34481
Mr. Gillespie:
RE: Case# 05-CA-7205
Thisofficeisreturningthefollowing pleadingspursuanttotheattached courtordersignedon
November15, 2010:
1. LettertoclerkdatedJuly6, 2011.
2. Plaintiff'sMotionto StrikeorSetAsideJointStipulationforDismissalwith Prejudiceand
Plaintiff'sMotionto StrikeorSetAsideSettlementAgreement.
3. Plaintiff'sMotiontoStrikeorSetAsideJointStipulationforDismissalwith Prejudiceand
Plaintiff'sMotionto StrikeorSetAsideSettlementAgreement.Appendix1.
4. Plaintiff'sMotiontoStrikeorSetAsideJointStipulationforDismissalwithPrejudiceand
Thankyou,
ClerkOfCircuitCourt
CircuitCivil Division
HillsboroughCounty, Florida

Plaintiff,
v.
WILLIAMJ.COOK,
Defendants.
______________,1
-':}
.' "'".. '"
",-
"-#
operationofthejudicialsystem,his rightto full access to thecourtshouldbecurtailedtothe
1of2
3808
theStateofFlorida.
th
dayof
November,2010.
( /d. '
!il111.VA,eli QiUL
Sendcopies to:
NeilJ. Gillespie
Plaintiff
8092SW 115
th
Loop
Ocala,FL34481
.
400NAshleyDrive
Suite2100
Tampa,FL33602
3809
20f2
July 6, 2011
Clerk of the Circuit Court
Circuit Civil
P.O. Box 989
Tampa, FL 33601-0989
RE: Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A., et aI, Case no: 2005 CA-7205, Division J
Kindly date stamp and file the following:
1. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO STRIKE OR SET ASIDE JOINT
STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE and PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION TO STRIKE OR SET ASIDE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
cc: Mr. Rodems
--------------
.

I
INTHECIRCUITCOURTOFTHETHIRTEENTHJUDICIALCIR6 !IT
INANDFORHILLSBOROUGHCOUNTY,FLORIDA \
GENERALCIVILDIVISION .
.
NEIL1. GILLESPIE,
Plaintiff, CASENO.: 05-CA-00n05
vs.
BARKER,RODEMS& COOK,P.A., DIVISION: J
aFloridacorporation;WILLIAM
J. COOK,
Defendants.
/
PLAINTIFF'SMOTIONTOSTRIKEORSETASIDEJOINTSTIPULATIONFOR
DISMISSALWITHPREJUDICE
PLAINTIFF'SMOTIONTOSTRIKEORSETASIDESETTLEMENTAGREEMENT
1. PlaintiffproseNeil1. Gillespie("Gillespie")movesto strikeorsetasidethe Joint
StipulationForDismissalWith Prejudice("jointstipulation")dated June21,2011.(ExhibitA).
Gillespiemovesto strikeorsetasidethe SettlementAgreementAndGeneralMutualRelease
("settlement")allegedlyagreedto by GillespieJune21,2011 whilehe was in thecustodyofthe
HillsboroughCountySheriff(HCSO)onawritofbodilyattachment.(ExhibitB-1).
2. Thejointstipulation,and settlement,werefraudulently obtainedfrom GillespiebyMr.
RodemswhileGillespie in custodyoftheHillsboroughCounty SheriffsOffice(HCSO)oncivil
contemptattheEdgecombCourthousein Tampa.Thejointstipulation,and settlement, mustbe
setaside,andarevoidorvoidable, forfraud, duress, mistake, undue influence,adhesion, lackof
informedconsent,disability orincapacity,sleepdepravation, malpracticeornegligenceby
jailers,threats, intimidation,yelling,andotherimproperconductby opposingcounselRyan
ChristopherRodems,and breachofduty by Gillespie'sformercounsel, EugeneP. Castagliuolo.
INAND FORHILLSBOROUGHCOUNTY,FLORIDA
NEILJ. GILLESPIE,
Plaintiff, CASENO.: 05-CA-007205 \ . :
vs.
1. COOK,
Defendants.
_____________1
APPENDIX1
Listof Exhibits
ExhibitA 06-21-201I,05-CA-00n, JointStipulationForDismissal WithPrejudice
ExhibitB 06-21-2011, 5:1O-cv-00503,NoticeofAssignmentClaims,MotionToDismiss
ExhibitC 06-30-2011,PlaintiffNJGnoticereMr. Castagliuolo
ExhibitD space
ExhibitE 06-22-2011,DraftCopy,MotionToSetAside, SettlementAgreement,etc.
ExhibitF 11-22-2010,5:10-cv-00503,Order,dismissal withoutprejudice,Rodems& BRC
ExhibitG 11-23-2010,5:10-cv-00503,Judgment,dismissal wlo prejudice,Rodems& BRC
ExhibitH 06-30-2011,PlaintiffNJG,MotionStrikeRodemsAssignment,StrikeAgreement
INANDFORHILLSBOROUGHCOUNTY,FLORIDA..
I

,
I
I
NEIL1. GILLESPIE,
C\
Plaintiff, CASENO.:05-CA-00n05
vs.
aFloridacorporation; WILLIAM
-
1. COOK,
Defendants.
------------_/
APPENDIX2
Listof Exhibits
Exhibit I 11-08-2010,Noticeof filing letters, Rodems,NJG,deposition
Exhibit2 Timelineofex-partehearings
Exhibit3 06-01-2011,PublicDefenderMotionForClarification
Exhibit4 06-01-2011, OrderRelievingPublicDefender
Exhibit5 06-01-2011, WritofBodilyAttachment
Exhibit6 06-16-2011,pIS Motion QuashWritBodilyAttachment,RecindWarrantforArrest
Exhibit7 06-20-2011,Rodemsemail, 1.22PM,w settlementagreement
Exhibit8 06-20-2011,Mr. Castagliuolo'semail, 1.59PM
Exhibit9 06-20-2011,Gillespie'semail,2.53 PMrejectedRodems' settlementoffer
Exhibit 10 10-28-2010,Dr. Huffer'sletter,NJG
September22, 2011
NeilJ. Gillespie
8092SW115
th
Loop
Ocala, FL34481
Mr. Gillespie:
Thisofficeisreturningthefollowing pleadingspursuanttotheattachedcourtordersignedon
November15,2010:
1. MotiontoAmendandCorrect- Affidavitand InventoryofPersonalPropertyofNeilJ.
Gillespieand DesignatedExemptions.
Thankyou,
ClerkOfCircuitCourt
CircuitCivilDivision
OFTHESTATEOFFLORIDA,INANDFORHILLSBOROUGHCOUNTY
NEILJ.GILLESPIE, CASEID: 05-CA-7205
Plaintiff,
v.
BARKER,RODEMS& COOK,P.A., DIVISION: G
WILLIAMJ. COOK,
Defendants.
______________-'1
." ...
.. ,.,:1
...
;:
ORDERPROffiBITINGPLAINTIFFFROMAPPEARINGPROSE
--,:;
"" .. '"
THISMATTERisbeforethe CourtonDefendants' "motionfor an order
" i'-l
to whyPlaintiffshouldnotbeprohibitedfrom henceforth appearingpro se," filed on
2010. It is allegedthatPlaintiffis an abusivelitigantwhoshouldnotbepermittedto file further
pleadingsin thiscauseunlesstheyare first reviewedandsignedbyan attorneylicensed to practic::e
law in this state. DefendantsallegethatPlaintiffsprosecutionis an affrontto the dignityofthe
judicialsystemand an unacceptableburdenon its resources. On November4,2010,thiscourt
issued the orderto showcausewhyPlaintiffshouldnotbeprohibitedfrom appearingpro se.
AmongPlaintiff'sresponsewerehis fourth and fifth attemptstodisqualifythis court. This
responseistypicalofPlaintiffslitigationstyle. And hiscontinuingcourseofconductin this case
is all themoretroublesomebecausethis caseis presently'pendingappellatereview ofafinal
summaryjudgmentorder. Thereis nothingleftto litigateatthis time. Yet Plaintiffcontinuesto
file spuriouspleadingswith thiscourt,eachofwhichmustbe reviewedandevaluatedbymembers
ofthecourtstaff. Forthesereasonsand the reasonsenumeratedin themotion, theCourthereby
finds thatPlaintiffis an abusivelitigantand, inorderto preserveboththedignityandtheefficient
operationofthejudicialsystem,hisrightto full access to thecourtshouldbecurtailedto the
extentdescribedin this order. PlaintiffisherebyPROHIBITEDfrom filing anypaperwith this
courtwhichis notsignedby an attorneydulylicensedto practicelaw in theStateofFlorida.
10f2
TheCountherefore ORDERSas follows:
1. PlaintiffSHALLCEASEfilinganypleading,correspondence,orotherdocumentin this
caseunless the documentis signedbyan attorneywho is dulylicensed to practicelaw in
theStateofFlorida.
2. TheClerkofCourtSHALLREJECTfor filinganydocumentreceivedfromPlaintiff
whichdoes notbeartheclearandconspicuoussignatureofan attorneydulylicensedto
3. TheClerkofCourtSHALLNOTDOCKETanypleading, correspondenceorother
documentreceivedfromPlaintiffwhichis prohibitedbythis order.
DONEAND ORDEREDin Chambersin HillsboroughCounty,Florida,this 15
th
dayof
November,2010.
i
7 ,
".
"}'" '
I),.1.<.1Lct ._.. 8'M-!L
IQA2RTHAJ.CO, CircuitJudge
STATEOFFLORIDA ,
COUNTYOFHILLSBOROUGH) ""U!
THISISTOCERTIFYTHATTHE FOREGOINGc: IN
AND CORRECT COPY OF THE DOCUMENT SEAL
MY OFFICE.JITNESS MY (I
Sendcopiesto:
1HI8 OF 59 --
NeilJ. Gillespie
G)
PATFRANK .
Plaintiff
. CLERKOFCIRCUIT
8092SW 115
th
Loop
.0.
Ocala,FL34481
,
AttorneyforDefendant
400NAshleyDrive
Suite2100
Tampa,FL33602
3809
20f2
INANDFORHILLSBOROUGHCOUNTY,FLORIDA
NEIL J. GILLESPIE,
Plaintiff, CASE NO.: 05-CA-7205
vs.
BARKER, RODEMS & COOK, P.A., DIVISION: J
a Florida corporation; WILLIAM
J. COOK,
Defendants.
------------_----.:/
MOTIONTOAMENDANDCORRECT
AFFIDAVITANDINVENTORYOFPERSONALPROPERTYOF
NEILJ. GILLESPIEANDDESIGNATEDEXEMPTIONS
Plaintiff moves under Rule 1.190(e), Fla.R.Civ.P, to amend and correct as follows:
I. Plaintiff moves to amend and correct his Affidavit And Inventory OfPersonal
Property ofNeil J Gillespie and Designated Exemptions, May 16,2011 as follows:
(a) Paragraph 5, "The contents ofthe premise are owned by the trust." should read
"The contents of the premise are owned by the estate."
2. Plaintiff moves to amend and correct his Affidavit And Inventory OfPersonal
Property o/Neil J Gillespie and Designated Exemptions, Amended, July 29,2010:
(a) Paragraph 5, "The contents of the premise are owned by the trust." should read
"The contents of the premise are owned by the estate."
(b) The list of personal property (owned in the State of Florida) of Neil Gillespie
(Exhibit A) should remove the following domain names:
$ 5.00 domain name, http://creepazoidlawyer.blogspot.com/
$ 25.00 domain name, www.FluffyTheBunny.com
Upon information and belief, the domain names are either not personal property
nor located in the State of Florida. ICANN, The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names
and Numbers, is the manager for domain names located in Marina del Rey, California. In
the alternative, if domain names reside on servers, the hosting companies, Blogger
(Google) and GoDaddy respectively, are not located in Florida.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff moves to amend and correct as described herein.'
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED September 12, 2011.
Certificate of Service
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the f9regoing has been
furnished by US mail September 12,2010 to Ryan C. Rodems, at Barker, Rodems &
Cook, PA, 400 North Ashley Drive, Suite 2100, Tampa, Florida 33602.
Page - 2
.. l. -
.... ""'\\\\\
Pat Frank
016H26525091
,.. Clerk of the Circuit Court oen
- i
wen
..
:... "
tV'
lr.
Circuit Civil Division
oU vr
P.O. Box 989 en ... /tl 09'22'2011
wCIJ ::z::
Tampa. Florida 33601-0989 a: a: Mailed From 33602
0.-
217 Li.
US POSTAGE
j
Neil JGillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala FL 34481

"\lI(l/tll'1'1I1III(II.111
'1
(1111111111'III(l1l11'lII'fllllllll'
-..------ --- t $ e
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
NEIL J . GILLESPIE
Appellant,
Case No.: 2D10-5197
vs.
BARKER, RODEMS & COOK, PA, a Florida
Corporation; and WILLIAM J . COOK,
Appellees.
________________________________________/
APPELLANTS MOTION TO AMEND NOTICE OF APPEAL
Appellant pro se, Neil J . Gillespie (Gillespie) moves to amend his Notice of Appeal
and states:
1. Appellant filed a timely Notice of Appeal October 22, 2010 in the lower tribunal that
was transmitted to this Court and assigned case number 2D10-5197. Appellant appealed Final
Summary J udgment As To Count 1, September 28, 2010, and Order Adjudging Plaintiff Neil J .
Gillespie Contempt, September 30, 2010.
2. Subsequently J udge Martha Cook entered a number of additional orders, one prohibiting
Gillespie from appearing pro se. Gillespie moves to amend his notice of appeal to include orders
prohibiting him from appearing pro se, including:
a. Order To Show Cause Why Plaintiff Should Not Be Prohibited From Appearing
Pro Se, November 4, 2010, allowing 20 days for Plaintiff to respond; (Exhibit 1)
b. Order Prohibiting Plaintiff From Appearing Pro Se, November 15, 2010, entered
before the time expired for Plaintiff to respond to the Order to Show Cause. (Exhibit 2)
2
3. The Order Prohibiting Plaintiff From Appearing Pro Se was entered November 15, 2010
by J udge Cook. (Exhibit 2). On its face the Order is a sham, because J udge Cook entered the
Order before the time expired for Gillespie to respond. J udge Cooks Order to Show Cause Why
Plaintiff Should Not Be Prohibited From Appearing Pro Se was entered November 4, 2010
(Exhibit 1) and mandates:
It is therefore ORDERED that Plaintiff SHALL RESPOND to the motion, in writing,
within twenty days of the date of this order and SHOW CAUSE, if any, why the Clerk of
Court should not be instructed to reject for filing any future pleadings, petitions, motions
or other documents which he submits for filing unless they are signed by a member of
The Florida Bar.
The twenty day time period to respond would have run through November 24, 2010 plus an
additional 5 days for service by mail, or November 29, 2010. Order Prohibiting Plaintiff From
Appearing Pro Se was entered November 15, 2010 thereby denying Gillespie nine (9) days to
respond.
4. The Order Prohibiting Plaintiff From Appearing Pro Se (Exhibit 2) states this case is
presently pending appellate review of a final summary judgment order and There is nothing left
to litigate at this time. ( 2). Yet Mr. Rodems continued to file pleadings in the trial court to
disrupt the appeal in 2D10-5197, and force a settlement from Gillespie while in custody of the
Hillsborough County Sheriffs Office on a writ of bodily attachment that followed another sham
Order of J udge Cook, Order Adjudging Plaintiff Neil J . Gillespie Contempt, entered September
30, 2010, and subsequently impeached by a J anuary 12, 2011 letter from Major Livingston, the
HCSO Commander of Court Operations.
3
5. On April 26, 2011 Mr. Rodems moved to strike Gillespies pleadings with Defendants
Motion To Strike Pro Se Filings By Plaintiff. (Exhibit 4).
6. J udge Cook was a defendant in a federal lawsuit when the Orders in Exhibits 1 and 2
were issued, and therefore J udge Cook had a conflict of interest with Gillespie, who was a
plaintiff in the federal lawsuit, Gillespie v. Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, Florida, et al., case no.
5:10-cv-00503, US District Court, MD FL, Ocala Division.
7. Mr. Rodems and William J . Cook, partners at Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A., and
Appellees and Appellees counsel in this case and appeal, have made campaign contributions to
J udge Martha Cook. Gillespie did not make a campaign contribution to J udge Cook, putting him
at severe disadvantage. University of Tennessee College of Law Professor Benjamin H. Barton,
author of the book The Lawyer-J udge Bias in the American Legal System, wrote that virtually
all American judges are former lawyers, a shared background that results in the lawyer-judge
bias. Professor Bartons book argues that these lawyer-judges instinctively favor the legal
profession in their decisions and that this bias has far-reaching and deleterious effects on
American law. Professor Barton discussed this in a YouTube video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hbs_3lePAjE&feature=player_embedded
8. The timing of J udge Cooks Order, November 15, 2010, is suspect and coincides with her
Order Denying Fourth Motion To Disqualify Trial J udge of even date which showed J udge Cook
was insolvent. J udge Cooks Order prohibiting Gillespie from appearing pro se was an effort to
silence legitimate inquiry into her financial affairs, which showed that J udge Cook was insolvent
due to a near-collapse of the family business, Community Bank of Manatee, which was
operating under Consent Order, FDIC-09-569b and OFR 0692-FI-10/09. As shown in Plaintiffs
4th Motion To Disqualify J udge Martha J . Cook, filed November 10, 2010, J udge Cooks
4
financial affairs violated the Code of J udicial Canons 2, 3, 5 and 6. J udge Cooks small ($276M)
nonmember FDIC insured bank lost over $10 million dollars in 2009 and 2010. In 2009 the bank
sold a controlling interest to a foreign national, who during the review process in Florida, failed
to disclose that his past employer, ABN AMRO Bank, faced one of the largest Money
Laundering and Trading With The Enemy cases ever brought by the Department of J ustice.
9. J udge Cook recused herself sua sponte November 18, 2010, the same day Gillespie filed
his Verified Emergency Motion For Writ of Prohibition and Motion for Order of Protection in
this Court, case no. 2D10-5529.
10. For almost eight (8) months the Clerk of the Circuit Court did not comply with J udge
Cooks Order Prohibiting Plaintiff From Appearing Pro Se and accepted Gillespies filings.
(Exhibit 3). However in a letter dated J uly 11, 2011 (received by Gillespie J uly 14, 2011) the
Clerk returned Gillespies filings submitted J uly 6, 2011 and filed J uly 7, 2011. (Exhibit 5). The
Clerk even struck her own filed stamp. The Clerk returned Gillespies Motion to Strike or Set
Aside J oint Stipulation For Dismissal With Prejudice, and Motion to Strike or Set Aside
Settlement Agreement. (Exhibit 5). A pleading in a cause after filing becomes a part of the
record and should not be altered, amended, or destroyed without permission of the court, on due
notice to the opposite party, and should be kept by the clerk in files of his office. Gracy v.
Fielding, 83 Fla. 388, 91 So. 373. Appellant did not receive notice that his pleading would be
struck by the Clerk after the Clerk filed the pleading J uly 7, 2011. The Clerk has a legal duty to
maintain and to provide access to the records contained in its files unless the records are legally
exempt from disclosure. Radford v. Brock, App. 2 Dist., 914 So.2d 1066 (2005). The Clerk has
failed her duty to maintain the file in this case.
11. GiventhattheOrderProhibitingPlaintiff FromAppearingProSeisashamassetforthin
paragraph3,andthattheClerkfailedtomaintainthefileassetforth intheprecedingparagraph,
perhapsthisCourtcouldstrikesuaspontetheOrder.Gillespieisunabletofindcounselwilling
tosignhispleadings,giventhenatureof Mr.Rodems' litigationstyle,whichwasdescribedby
Gillespie'sformercounselMr. Bauerasa"fullnuclearblastapproach"anda"fullblastattack".
WHEREFORE,AppellantmovesforleavetoamendhisNoticeofAppeal,orotherrelief
thisCourtdeemsappropriate,includingstrikingtheOrderProhibitingPlaintiff FromAppearing
ProSe,orcompellingtheClerktoreinstateGillespie'spleadingsfiledJuly7, 2011.
RESPECTFULLYSUBMITIEDJuly 18,2011.
Certificateof Service
IHEREBYCERTIFYthataPDFCDcopyof theforegoingwasmailedJuly 18,2011 to
RyanC.Rodems,400NorthAshleyDrive, Suite2100,Tampa,Florida33602.
5
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
NEIL J . GILLESPIE
Appellant,
Case No.: 2D10-5197
vs.
BARKER, RODEMS & COOK, PA, a Florida
Corporation; and WILLIAM J . COOK,
Appellees.
________________________________________/
APPELLANTS MOTION TO AMEND NOTICE OF APPEAL
APPENDIX
Exhibit 1 Order To Show Cause Why Plaintiff Should Not Be Prohibited From Appearing
Pro Se, November 4, 2010, allowing 20 days for Plaintiff to respond
Exhibit 2 Order Prohibiting Plaintiff From Appearing Pro Se, November 15, 2010, entered
before the time expired for Plaintiff to respond to the Order to Show Cause.
Exhibit 3 Letter of Ryan C. Rodems to the Clerk, May 31, 2011.
Exhibit 4 Defendants Motion To Strike Pro Se Filings By Plaintiff, April 26, 2011
Exhibit 5 Letter from the Clerk of the Circuit Court to Gillespie, J uly 11, 2011, with enclosures.
NEILJ.GILLESPIE, CASEID: 05-CA-7205
Plaintiff,
v.
BARKER,RODEMS&COOK,P.A., DIVISION: G
WILLIAMJ.COOK,
Defendants.
--------------,
ORDERTOSHOWCAUSEWHYPLAINTIFF
SHOULDNOTBEPROHIBITEDFROMAPPEARINGPROSE
THISMATTERisbeforetheCourtonDefendants'"motionforanordertoshowcauseas
towhyPlaintiffshouldnotbeprohibitedfromhenceforthappearingpro se," filedonJuly29,
2010. It isallegedthatPlaintiffisanabusivelitigantwhoshouldnotbepermittedto file further
pleadingsinthiscauseunlesstheyarefirstreviewedandsignedbyanattorneylicensedtopractice
lawinthisstate. Thecatalogueof Plaintiffsdisruptiveconductisextensive.
Thecourtisevermindfulof theconstitutionalrighteachcitizenenjoysto accessthecourts
of thisstatefortheredressof theirgrievances.
l
Thecourtisequallymindfulthatthisisaright
sharedbyallof thisstate'scitizens. Withouteachcourt'sattentiontotheefficientadministration
ofjusticeandwithouteachlitigant'sexerciseof decorum,discretionandcompetenceinthe
pursuitof theirclaims,therightofallto accessthecourtsbecomes,inapplication,onewhichis
exercisedonlybythelitigantwhosevoiceisloudestandwhosepresenceismostdisruptive. This
theconstitutiondoesnotrequire. Theconstitutiongrantsnoparticularindividualtherightto
wastethosejudicialresourceswhicharevouchsafedtousallequally- judicialresourcesare
scarceandtheymustbeallocatedprudentlysothatallcitizensmaybenefitfromthem. Andso
therearestandards,bothof competenceandof decency,whicheachlitigantisexpectedto meetin
thepursuitofjustice. Thepro se litigantisheldto thesamestandardof competencyas an
I See ArticleI, s. 21,FloridaConstitution.
lof2
1
attorney.
2
Andhemustadhereto therulesofcourtandofcivilprocedureaswouldanymember
of theBar.
3
Thereisnoreasontoholdthepro se litigantto alesserstandardofdecency. Sowe
may justly look to the rulesof professional conduct as wellas toour common notionsof decorum
to findwhatconductisrequiredof everylitigant. Themotionallegesmanyfactswhichcontradict
theseideals. Anabusivelitigantwillnotbetoleratedtohandicapthejudicialfunctionuponwhich
allcitizensdepend.
4
It isthereforeORDERED thatPlaintiffSHALL RESPOND tothemotion, inwriting,
withintwentydaysof thedateofthisorderandSHOW CAUSE,ifany,whytheClerkofCourt
shouldnotbeinstructedtorejectforfilinganyfuturepleadings,petitions,motionsorother
documentswhichhesubmitsforfilingunlesstheyaresignedbyamemberof TheFloridaBar.
Failureto file atimelyresponseto themotionmayresultinitsbeinggranted.
DONE AND ORDERED inChambersinHillsboroughCounty,Florida,this__dayof
November,2010.
Sendcopiesto:
NeilJ. Gillespie
Plaintiff
8092 SWIIS
th
Loop
Ocala,FL34481
400NAshleyDrive
Suite2100
Tampa,FL33602
2 See Kohn v. City ofMiami Beach, 611 So.2d538,539-40(Fla.3dDCA 1993).
3 See Carr v. Grace, 321 So. 2d618 (Fla.3dDCA1975),cert. denied, 348 So. 2d945 (Fla. 1977).
4 See e.g. Day v. State, 903 So. 2d886, 888(Fla. 2005);Platel v. Maguire, Voorhies & Wells, P.A., 436So. 2d303,
304(Fla.5
th
DCA1983).
20f2
NEILJ.GILLESPIE,
CASEID: 05-CA-7205
Plaintiff,
v.
BARKER,RODEMS & COOK,P.A.,
DIVISION: G
WILLIAMJ.COOK,
Defendants.
------------_.-:/
THISMATTERisbeforetheCourtonDefendants' "motionforanordertoshowcauseas
towhyPlaintiffshouldnotbeprohibitedfromhenceforthappearingpro se," filedonJuly29,
2010. Itis allegedthatPlaintiffis anabusivelitigantwhoshouldnotbepermittedtofile further
pleadingsinthiscauseunlesstheyarefirstreviewedandsignedbyan attorneylicensedtopractice
lawinthis state. DefendantsallegethatPlaintiff'sprosecutionis an affronttothedignityofthe
judicialsysten1andanunacceptableburdenonitsresources. OnNovember4, 2010,thiscourt
issuedtheordertoshowcausewhyPlaintiffshouldnotbeprohibitedfromappearingpro se.
AmongPlaintiff sresponsewerehisfourth andfifth attemptstodisqualifythiscourt. This
responseistypicalofPlaintiff'slitigationstyle. Andhiscontinuingcourseofconductinthiscase
is allthemoretroublesomebecausethiscaseis presentlypendingappellatereviewofafinal
summaryjudgmentorder. Thereis nothinglefttolitigateatthistime. YetPlaintiffcontinuesto
file spuriouspleadingswiththiscourt,eachofwhichmustbereviewedandevaluatedbymembers
ofthecourtstaff. Forthesereasonsandthereasonsenumeratedinthemotion,theCourthereby
finds thatPlaintiffis anabusivelitigantand,inordertopreserveboththedignityandtheefficient
operationofthejudicialsystem,hisrighttofull accesstothecourtshouldbecurtailedtothe
extentdescribedinthisorder. PlaintiffisherebyPROHIBITEDfromfiling anypaperwiththis
courtwhichisnotsignedbyanattorneydulylicensedtopracticelawintheStateofFlorida.
lof2
2
---------------
TheCourtthereforeORDERSas follows:
1. PlaintiffSHALLCEASEfilinganypleading,correspondence,orotherdocumentinthis
caseunlessthedocumentis signedbyanattorneywhoisdulylicensedtopracticelawin
theStateofFlorida.
2. TheClerkofCourtSHALLREJECTforfilinganydocumentreceivedfromPlaintiff
whichdoesnotbeartheclearandconspicuoussignatureofan attorneydulylicensedto
practicelawinthisstate.
documentreceivedfromPlaintiffwhichisprohibitedbythisorder.
DONEANDORDEREDinChambersinHillsboroughCounty,Florida,this 15
th
dayof
November,2010.
ORlGINAL SjGi\JED
NOV 15 20IJ
MARTHAJ.COOK, CircuitJudge l:,i<THA J ~
CIRCUIT JUDGr
Sendcopiesto:
NeilJ. Gillespie
Plaintiff
8092SW 115
th
Loop
Ocala,FL34481
400NAshleyDrive
Suite2100
Tampa,FL33602
2of2
3
INTHECIRCUITCOURTOFTHETIDRTEENTHJUDICIALCIRCillT
INANDFORHILLSBOROUGHCOUNTY,FLORIDA
NEILJ.GILLESPIE,
Plaintiff,
vs. CaseNo.: 05-CA-007205
Division: J
BARKER,RODEMS& COOK,P.A.,
aFloridacorporation;andWILLIAM
J.COOK,
Defendants.
--------------
I
DEFENDANTS'MOTIONTOSTRIKEPROSEFILINGSBYPLAINTIFF
DefendantsBarker,Rodems& Cook,P.A. andWilliamJ. Cookmovetostrikeallprose
filingsbyPlaintiffNeilJ. GillespieonorafterNovember15,2010,andasgroundsthereforwould
state:
1. OnNovember15,2010,thisCourtenteredtheOrderProhibitingPlaintifffrom
AppearingProSe(November15,2010Order),whichPlaintiffdidnotappeal. Atrueandcorrect
copyof theNovember15,2010Orderisattachedhereto.
2. IntheNovember15,2010Order,theCourtfound"thatPlaintiffisanabusive
litigantand,inorderto preserveboththedignityandtheefficientoperationof thejudicialsystem
...Plaintiff isherebyPROHIBITEDfromfilinganypaperwiththiscourtwhichisnotsignedby
anattorneydulylicensedtopracticelawintheStateofFlorida."(Emphasisinoriginal).
3. TheNovember15,2010OrderalsodirectedtheClerktorejectanyfilings from
Plaintiffandto notdocketanyfilingsfromPlaintiff.
4. Incontumaciousdisregardof theNovember15,2010Order,Plaintiffcontinuesto
filedocumentswithoutthesignatureofanattorneydulylicensedtopracticeintheStateof Florida.
4
WHEREFORE,DefendantsmovetostrikePlaintiffs'filingsonorafterNovember15,
2010thatarenotsignedbyanattorneydulylicensedtopracticeintheStateof Florida.
DATEDthis26thdayof April,2011.
STOPHERRO EMS,ESQUIRE
FloridaB No.947652
Barker,Rodems&Cook,P.A.
400NorthAshleyDrive,Suite2100
Tampa,Florida33602
Telephone: 813/489-1001
Facsimile: 813/489-1008
AttorneysforDefendants
CERTIFICATEOFSERVICE
IHEREBYCERTIFYthatatrueandcorrectcopyof theforegoinghasbeenfurnishedvia
U.S. Mailto NeilJ. Gillespie,8092SW115
th
Loop,OcalaFlorida34481 this 26thdayofA ril,
2011.
2
July11, 2011
NeilJ. Gillespie
8092 SW115
th
Loop
Ocala, FL34481
Mr. Gillespie:
RE: Case# 05-CA-7205
Thisofficeisreturningthefollowing pleadingspursuanttotheattached courtordersignedon
November15, 2010:
1. LettertoclerkdatedJuly6, 2011.
2. Plaintiff'sMotionto StrikeorSetAsideJointStipulationforDismissalwith Prejudiceand
Plaintiff'sMotionto StrikeorSetAsideSettlementAgreement.
3. Plaintiff'sMotiontoStrikeorSetAsideJointStipulationforDismissalwith Prejudiceand
4. Plaintiff'sMotiontoStrikeorSetAsideJointStipulationforDismissalwithPrejudiceand
Thankyou,
ClerkOfCircuitCourt
CircuitCivil Division
5

Plaintiff,
v.
WILLIAMJ.COOK,
Defendants.
______________,1
-':}
.' "'".. '"
",-
"-#
operationofthejudicialsystem,his rightto full access to thecourtshouldbecurtailedto the
1of2
3808
theStateofFlorida.
th
dayof
November,2010.
( /d. '
!il111.VA,eli QiUL
Sendcopies to:
NeilJ. Gillespie
Plaintiff
8092SW 115
th
Loop
Ocala,FL34481
.
400NAshleyDrive
Suite2100
Tampa,FL33602
3809
20f2
July 6, 2011
Circuit Civil
P.O. Box 989
Tampa, FL 33601-0989
RE: Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A., et aI, Case no: 2005 CA-7205, Division J
Kindly date stamp and file the following:
1. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO STRIKE OR SET ASIDE JOINT
STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE and PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION TO STRIKE OR SET ASIDE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
cc: Mr. Rodems
--------------
.

I
INTHECIRCUITCOURTOFTHETHIRTEENTHJUDICIALCIR6 !IT
INANDFORHILLSBOROUGHCOUNTY,FLORIDA \
GENERALCIVILDIVISION .
.
NEIL1. GILLESPIE,
Plaintiff, CASENO.: 05-CA-00n05
vs.
J. COOK,
Defendants.
/
1. PlaintiffproseNeil1. Gillespie("Gillespie")movesto strikeorsetasidethe Joint
StipulationForDismissalWith Prejudice("jointstipulation")dated June21,2011.(ExhibitA).
Gillespiemovesto strikeorsetasidethe SettlementAgreementAndGeneralMutualRelease
("settlement")allegedlyagreedto by GillespieJune21,2011 whilehe was in thecustodyofthe
HillsboroughCountySheriff(HCSO)onawritofbodilyattachment.(ExhibitB-1).
2. Thejointstipulation,and settlement,werefraudulently obtainedfrom GillespiebyMr.
RodemswhileGillespie in custodyoftheHillsboroughCounty SheriffsOffice(HCSO)oncivil
contemptattheEdgecombCourthousein Tampa.Thejointstipulation,and settlement, mustbe
setaside,andarevoidorvoidable, forfraud, duress, mistake, undue influence,adhesion, lackof
informedconsent,disability orincapacity,sleepdepravation, malpracticeornegligenceby
jailers,threats, intimidation,yelling,andotherimproperconductby opposingcounselRyan
ChristopherRodems,and breachofduty by Gillespie'sformercounsel, EugeneP. Castagliuolo.
INAND FORHILLSBOROUGHCOUNTY,FLORIDA
NEILJ. GILLESPIE,
Plaintiff, CASENO.: 05-CA-007205 \ . :
vs.
1. COOK,
Defendants.
_____________1
APPENDIX1
Listof Exhibits
ExhibitA 06-21-201I,05-CA-00n, JointStipulationForDismissal WithPrejudice
ExhibitB 06-21-2011, 5:1O-cv-00503,NoticeofAssignmentClaims,MotionToDismiss
ExhibitC 06-30-2011,PlaintiffNJGnoticereMr. Castagliuolo
ExhibitD space
ExhibitE 06-22-2011,DraftCopy,MotionToSetAside, SettlementAgreement,etc.
ExhibitF 11-22-2010,5:10-cv-00503,Order,dismissal withoutprejudice,Rodems& BRC
ExhibitG 11-23-2010,5:10-cv-00503,Judgment,dismissal wlo prejudice,Rodems& BRC
ExhibitH 06-30-2011,PlaintiffNJG,MotionStrikeRodemsAssignment,StrikeAgreement
INANDFORHILLSBOROUGHCOUNTY,FLORIDA..
I

,
I
I
NEIL1. GILLESPIE,
C\
Plaintiff, CASENO.:05-CA-00n05
vs.
aFloridacorporation; WILLIAM
-
1. COOK,
Defendants.
------------_/
APPENDIX2
Listof Exhibits
Exhibit I 11-08-2010,Noticeof filing letters, Rodems,NJG,deposition
Exhibit2 Timelineofex-partehearings
Exhibit3 06-01-2011,PublicDefenderMotionForClarification
Exhibit4 06-01-2011, OrderRelievingPublicDefender
Exhibit5 06-01-2011, WritofBodilyAttachment
Exhibit6 06-16-2011,pIS Motion QuashWritBodilyAttachment,RecindWarrantforArrest
Exhibit7 06-20-2011,Rodemsemail, 1.22PM,w settlementagreement
Exhibit8 06-20-2011,Mr. Castagliuolo'semail, 1.59PM
Exhibit9 06-20-2011,Gillespie'semail,2.53 PMrejectedRodems' settlementoffer
Exhibit 10 10-28-2010,Dr. Huffer'sletter,NJG
VIAU.P.S.No. lZ64589FP291405994 August30,2013
Email: bohnerd@hillsclerk.com
DaleBohner,CounseltotheClerk
Officeof theClerkof theCircuitCourt
ThirteenthJudicialCircuit
th
Floor
Tampa,FL33601
RE: NeilJ. Gillespievs. Barker,Rodems&Cook,PAetaI, No. 05-CA-7205
DearMr. Bohner:
ThisletteristoinformtheClerkoferrorsshowingontheonlinecase summaryinthe
abovecaptionedlawsuit. Inaddition,IherebygivenoticepursuanttoRule2.430(g),
Fla.R.Jud.Admin.,tosurrendertomethecasefile intheabovecaptionedcasepriortoit
beingdestroyedinaccordancewithregulardestructionschedules.
1. Theonline"casesummary"neglectstoshowMr. Bauerasmyretainedcounselof
recordfronlApril2, 2007throughOctober9,2009. Pleaseupdateorcorrecttherecord.
RobertW. Bauer,FloridaBarIDNo. 11058
LawOfficeofRobertW. Bauer,P.A.
2815NW13thSt. Suite200E
Gainesville,Florida32609-2861
PleasefindenclosedMr. Bauer'sNoticeof AppearanceservedApril2, 2007.Also
enclosedisaconformedOrderof JudgeBartongrantingMr. Bauer'smotionto
withdrawalascounselenteredOctober9, 2009.
2. TIleonline"casesummary"neglectstoshowappointmentof thepublicdefender
May27,2011 torepresentme. AllisonRaistrickof theClerk'sIndigentScreeningUnit
appointedthepublicdefenderMay27,2011 foracivilcontempthearing.Thepublic
defenderwasrelievedJune 1,2011.PleasefindenclosedtheClerk'sdeterminationof
indigence,andtheClerk'sReceipt# 2052805 formy$50payment.Alsoenclosedisa
conformedorderrelievingthepublicdefenderJune 1, 2011 byJudgeArnold.
3. Theonline"casesummary"incorrectlyshowsanentry04/19/2001 NOTICEOF
FILINGLETTERSWITHTHEHONORABLEJAMESD. ARNOLDANDMR.
RODEMS.ATTACHED.USERID=HEALYParty: GILLESPIE,NEILJ. Thedateof
thisentryisten(10)yearsoffandappearstobeatypographicalerror.Thecasewas
openedAugust 11,2005,makinganentryin2001 impossible.Pleasecorrectthisentry.
Mr. DaleBohner,CounseltotheClerk August30,2013
Officeof theClerkoftheCircuitCourt
Page- 2
4. PleasebeadvisedthatIfiredEugeneP. CastagiuoloascounselonJune30,2011,
seetheenclosednoticeIfiledinfederalcourtinCase5:10-cv-00503.Doc. 34. Kindly
updatethecasesummarytoreflectthischange.
5. PursuanttoRule2.430(g),Fla.R.Jud.Adnlin.,Irequestthefile inNeilJ. Gillespie
vs. Barker,Rodems& Cook,PAetalcaseno. 05-CA-007205besurrenderedtomeprior
to itbeingdestroyedinaccordancewithregulardestructionschedules.
6. Regardingtheentry01/17/2012,DONOTENTERADDITIONALOCUMENTS
PERD. BOHNER,LEGALADVISORTOCLERK(PERCOURTORDERDATED
11/15/10),pleasebeadvisedthattheordertlpOnwhichyourelybyMarthaCook, Order
Prohibiting Plaintifffrom Appearing Pro Se, isnotalegitimateorder,butashamorder
corruptlyentered.
RecentlyMr. RodenlssubmittedaconformedcopyofMarthaCook'sshamordertoThe
FloridaBaraspartofhisUPLcomplaintagainstme. InresponseImadeAFFIDAVIT
OFNEILJ. GILLESPIEONJUDGEMARTHAJ. COOK'SOrder Prohibiting Plaintiff
from Appearing Pro Se [A ShamOrder],June 14,2013.Acopyisenclosed.
AlsoenclosedasaseparatevolumeappendixtomyaffidavitisPlaintiff's 4th Motion to
Disqualify Judge Martha J. Cook Filed, November10,2010.
OnAugust21,2013 ImadeacomplaintagainstMarthaCooktotheappropriateagency.
MycomplaintshowsMarthaCookfailedonSeptember28,2010toproperlyrespondto
myspokenmotiontodisqualifyher,andfailedto providemeareasonableamountof
timetoreducemymotiontodisqualifyhertowritingasrequiredbyRogersv. State,630
So. 2d513 (Fla. 1993).Thus,anyorderenteredbyMarthaCookonorafterSeptember
28,2010isnotreliable,sinceitwasenteredcorruptly.Thus,theorderisasham.
Thankyouinadvanceforthecourtesyofaresponse.
S.
~ . ~ .
e : ; ~
092 SW 5
th
Loop
Ocala,Florida34481
Telephone: (352)854-7807
Enlail: neilgillespie@mfi.net
Enclosuresasnoted
Ps. Pleaseadviseiftheaddressshownforyouiscorrect.UPSreportsitcannotlocatethis
addressinitssystem,althoughhavingpersonallyvisitedtheaddress,Iknowitisvalid.
September 12,2013
NeilJ. Gillespie
8092 SW 115thLoop
Ocala, FL 34481-3567
RE: Neil1. Gillespiev. Barker, Rodems& Cook,P.A.,etal.
CaseNo.: 05-CA-00n05
DearMr. Gillespie:
This letteris in response to your letterdated August 30, 2013. First, youraddressfor me
is correct, except for the zip code which is 33602. I also receive mail at the Clerk'spost office
box. That address is: P.O. Box 1110, Tampa, FL 33601. Note there is a difference in the zip
codes. In response to the issues addressed in your letter, please be advised that Ireviewed these
issueswiththeDirectoroftheClerk'sCircuitCivil Divisionand respondas follows:
1. The online "case summary" does not show historical information about Mr.
Bauer under party information. The case summary does show the referenced
notice ofappearance and order granting Mr. Bauer's motion to withdraw. The
information in the online case summary is consistent with the requirements of
Florida Supreme Court AOSC07-49, which at paragraph 2, describes the type of
casedocketinformationthatmaybeviewedelectronicallybythepublic.
2. Theresponseto the first issueaboveappliesto yoursecond issue.
3. Yourobservationaboutthe 04119/2001 NoticeofFiling Lettersetc., is correct.
This was a typographical errorand the date was corrected to 04119/2011. Thank
you.
, .
4. Mr. Castagiuolo will be removed as your attorney froin- the "case summary"
whenthe Clerkreceivesanorderfrom the Courtauthorizinghiswithdrawal.
601 East Kennedy Boulevard P.O. Box 1110 Tampa, Florida 33601 Telephone 813.276.8100
An Affirmative Action - Equal Opportunity Employer
Neil J. Gillespie
September 12, 2013
Page 2
5. You are entitled to apply to the Court for an order requiring the Clerk to
deliver to you the court records that are to be destroyed or disposed of under Rule
2.430(g). The Clerk will obey the directions in such an order.
6. I have reviewed your position. If the referenced order is superseded by
another order, the Clerk will follow the directions contained in such an order.
I trust I have provided you with the information that you requested. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
\ k { j ~
Dale K. Bohner, Esq.
Legal Counsel to the Clerk
016H26525064 PAT FRANK
CCI)
601 East Kennedy Boulevard wU)
__..
P.O. Box 11 10

OU
VI
Tampa, Florida 13"'01-1110
(lU- 09/12/2013
:I:
a:: a:: MailMl From 33602

wU)

&L
Clerk of thE' CircuitCourt
US POSTAGE
13thJudiCial Clfcuit
NEILJ. GILLESPIE
8092 SW115TH LP
OCALA FL 34481-3567
\-..
\.11",1,11 '1'1'1
1
111" ",1111,11111'1'1'11" '11
'
",I"1.11'1'11 l
VIA First Class Mail and Email: bohnerd@hillsclerk.com J anuary 7, 2014
Dale Bohner, Counsel to the Clerk
Office of theClerk of the Circuit Court
Thirteenth J udicial Circuit
601 E. Kennedy Blvd., 13th Floor
Tampa, FL 33602
RE: Your letter September 12, 2013
Dear Mr. Bohner:
It has come to my attention that your attached letter September 12, 2013 is not correct,
6. I have reviewed your position. If the referenced order is superseded by another
order, the Clerk will follow the directions contained in such an order.
and this docket entry in not correct or valid,
01/17/2012, DO NOT ENTER ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS PER D.
BOHNER, LEGAL ADVISOR TO CLERK (PER COURT ORDER DATED
11/15/10
Take notice that the order by Martha Cook, Order Prohibiting Plaintiff from Appearing
Pro Se, is not a legitimate order, but a sham order corruptly entered.
Nonetheless, the fact that the legislature cannot set a judge's vacation days brings up a
parallel and little known corollary: A judge cannot order the clerk of court to do anything
absent a legislative mandate. In civil court, court orders routinely contain language that
the clerk is ordered to do so and so forthwith. Unless the clerk is made a party to the
lawsuit, these orders are meaningless.
The Clerk is not a party to case no. 05-CA-7205, thus the order is meaningless. So you
may immediately remove from the docket Do Not Enter Additional Documents.
Previously pursuant to Rule 2.430(g), Fla.R.J ud.Admin., I requested the file in Neil J .
Gillespie vs. Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA et al case no. 05-CA-007205 be surrendered to
me prior to it being destroyed in accordance with regular destruction schedules. I now
believe that procedure is not correct. Pursuant to Rule 2.430(g) I may apply for an order:
Rule 2.430(g) Disposition Other Than Destruction. Before destruction or
disposition of court records under this rule, any person may apply to the court for
an order requiring the clerk to deliver to the applicant the court records that are to
be destroyed or disposed of. All parties shall be given notice of the application.
The court shall dispose of that court record as appropriate.
Mr. Dale Bohner, Counsel to the Clerk J anuary 7, 2014
Office of theClerk of the Circuit Court Page - 2
I am a consumer of legal and court services affecting interstate commerce in this case.
I commenced this lawsuit August 11, 2005 by filing the Complaint and paying a $255
filing fee, in cash, to the Clerk of the Court. I paid an additional $40 cash August 11,
2005 to the Hillsborough County Sheriff to serve the Complaint on the Defendants.
The Circuit Court of the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, in and for Hillsborough County,
Pat Frank was elected Clerk of the Court and is by virtue of that public position of trust
an officer of state government responsible for lawfully performing and discharging her
duties without bias, favoritism, extortion, improper influence, personal self enrichment,
self-dealing, concealment, and conflict of interest.
On information an belief, Clerk of Court Pat Frank, and you as counsel, are subject to
112.313(6) F.S., Misuse of Public Position:
112.313 Standards of conduct for public officers, employees of agencies, and
local government attorneys.
(6) MISUSE OF PUBLIC POSITION.No public officer, employee of an
exemption for himself, herself, or others. This section shall not be construed to
conflict with s. 104.31.
Also see 760.51 F.S., Violations of constitutional rights, civil action by the Attorney
General; civil penalty. Please take notice that A Public Office is a Public Trust.
Thank you in advance for the courtesy of a response.
Sincerely,
Neil J . Gillespie
8092 SW 115
th
Loop
Ocala, Florida 34481
Telephone: (352) 854-7807
Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net
Enclosures
September 12,2013
NeilJ. Gillespie
8092 SW 115thLoop
Ocala, FL 34481-3567
RE: Neil1. Gillespiev. Barker, Rodems& Cook,P.A.,etal.
CaseNo.: 05-CA-00n05
DearMr. Gillespie:
This letteris in response to your letterdated August 30, 2013. First, youraddressfor me
is correct, except for the zip code which is 33602. I also receive mail at the Clerk'spost office
box. That address is: P.O. Box 1110, Tampa, FL 33601. Note there is a difference in the zip
codes. In response to the issues addressed in your letter, please be advised that Ireviewed these
issueswiththeDirectoroftheClerk'sCircuitCivil Divisionand respondas follows:
1. The online "case summary" does not show historical information about Mr.
Bauer under party information. The case summary does show the referenced
notice ofappearance and order granting Mr. Bauer's motion to withdraw. The
information in the online case summary is consistent with the requirements of
Florida Supreme Court AOSC07-49, which at paragraph 2, describes the type of
casedocketinformationthatmaybeviewedelectronicallybythepublic.
2. Theresponseto the first issueaboveappliesto yoursecond issue.
3. Yourobservationaboutthe 04119/2001 NoticeofFiling Lettersetc., is correct.
This was a typographical errorand the date was corrected to 04119/2011. Thank
you.
, .
4. Mr. Castagiuolo will be removed as your attorney froin- the "case summary"
whenthe Clerkreceivesanorderfrom the Courtauthorizinghiswithdrawal.
Neil J. Gillespie
September 12, 2013
Page 2
5. You are entitled to apply to the Court for an order requiring the Clerk to
deliver to you the court records that are to be destroyed or disposed of under Rule
2.430(g). The Clerk will obey the directions in such an order.
6. I have reviewed your position. If the referenced order is superseded by
another order, the Clerk will follow the directions contained in such an order.
I trust I have provided you with the information that you requested. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
\ k { j ~
016H26525064 PAT FRANK
CCI)
601 East Kennedy Boulevard wU)
__..
P.O. Box 11 10

OU
VI
Tampa, Florida 13"'01-1110
(lU- 09/12/2013
:I:
a:: a:: MailMl From 33602

wU)

&L
Clerk of thE' CircuitCourt
US POSTAGE
13thJudiCial Clfcuit
NEILJ. GILLESPIE
8092 SW115TH LP
OCALA FL 34481-3567
\-..
\.11",1,11 '1'1'1
1
111" ",1111,11111'1'1'11" '11
'
",I"1.11'1'11 l
January 14,2014
Neil J. Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481-3567
RE: Your Letter Dated January 7, 2014
Dear Mr. Gillespie:
This letter will acknowledge receipt of your letter to me dated January 7, 2014. I have
read the position you take in your letter. If you apply to the Court for an order under Rule
2.430(g) requiring the Clerk to deliver the court records that are to be destroyed or disposed of
in Case 05-CA-007205, the Clerk will follow the directions of the Court. Your application,
when filed, will be forwarded to the Court for consideration.
Very truly yours,
PAT FRANK
__

'," .. ..

....---
13tr- jl.dl(,al Crcu,\
601 East Kennedy Boulevard
P.O. Box 1110
Tampa, Florida 33601-1110
*38).-
...

0'"
w
tfJ

tfJl-
III In

o..ii:
NEIL J. GILLESPIE
8092 SW 115TH LP
OCALA FL 34481-3567

Cl1
.
""
....
III
III
=

016H26525064

01/15/2014
33602
US POSTAGE

'rill" "lut
l
,I,IIII1
IlI
,"",,',"II,II/"Ililli,," '1,,11" "I

Pat Frank Clerk Ethics Complaint-Jan-30-2014

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pat Frank Clerk Ethics Complaint-Jan-30-2014

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DATE FILED

You might also like