Gov-Scott-notice-AG-Pam-Bondi-FS-16.02-appointment Needed FCHR No. 201400117

J odi J ones, Regulatory Specialist Governor Rick Scott
Florida Commission on Human Relations Office of Governor Rick Scott

2009 Apalachee Parkway, Suite 100 State of Florida, The Capitol
Tallahassee, FL 32301 400 South Monroe Street
Email: jodi.jones@fchr.myflorida.com Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0001
VIA U.P.S. No. 1Z64589FP295665527 Email: Rick.Scott@eog.myflorida.com
VIA UPS No. 1Z64589FP295521539
December 31, 2013 Notice - F.S. 16.02 Appointment of person
Re: FCHR No. 201400117 person to act in case of disability of
Attorney General
Dear Ms. J ones:
Thank you for your letter dated December 26, 2013. I received your letter after emailing you
yesterday about the status of my complaint. In response to your letter, please note that I appear
pro se because I cannot obtain counsel. I am a nonlawyer and I did not attend law school.
My complaint alleged violations of constitutional civil rights and disability rights. My cover
letter December 10, 2013 to the FCHR stated, Please find enclosed my complaint for civil rights
violations and disability discrimination against the persons and entities shown below. So your
reliance on Section 509.92, Section 760.10, or Sections 760.23-25, Florida Statutes is misplaced.
My complaint was limited by the required FCHR form, but I did cite to F.S. 760.51 on page 2.
F.S. 760.51 Violations of constitutional rights, civil action by the Attorney General; civil
penalty. Here, the Attorney General, part of the Executive Branch, wrongly conspired with the
J udicial Branch (Fla. Const. Art. II, Sec. 3, branches of govt. ) to obstruct justice and violate my
constitutional civil rights and disability rights. My complaint includes 21 parties, not just the
Attorney General, see the attached complaint. The Florida Bar has opened two inquires:
1. The Florida Bar File No. 2014-30,525 (9A), for Danielle Nicole Parsons, Bar ID 29364.
2. Unlicensed Practice of Law Investigation of Yolanda I. Martinez, Case No. 20143031(9A).
The Florida Commission on Ethics gave notice December 17, 2013 of seven complaints for
Misuse of Public Position, 112.313(6) F.S. I hereby waive confidentiality, see attached:
Complaint No. 13-201, Pamela J o Bondi, Attorney General of Florida, Executive Branch
Complaint No. 13-202, Diana R. Esposito, Chief Asst. Attorney General, Executive Branch
Complaint No. 13-203, Kenneth V. Wilson, Asst. Attorney General, Executive Branch
Complaint No. 13-204, Valerie Williford, Employee of Attorney General, Executive Branch
Complaint No. 13-205, Laura Martin, Employee of Attorney General, Executive Branch
Complaint No. 13-206, David Rowland, Gen. Counsel, Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, J udicial Branch
Complaint No. 13-207, Sandra Burge, paralegal, Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, J udicial Branch
Therefore, the Florida Commission on Human Relations should ask the Governor to appoint
another person to perform such duty in the Attorney Generals stead as provided by F.S. 16.02.
This letter to Governor Scott also requests appointment of another person under F.S. 16.02.
Ms. J odi J ones, Regulatory Specialist - FCHR December 31, 2013
Notice - F.S. 16.02 to Gov. Rick Scott Page - 2
F.S. 16.02 Appointment of person to act in case of disability of Attorney General.
In case of the disability of the Attorney General to perform any official duty devolving on him or
her, by reason of interest or otherwise, the Governor or Attorney General of this state may
appoint another person to perform such duty in the Attorney Generals stead.
F.S. 760.51 Violations of constitutional rights, civil action by the Attorney General; civil
penalty.
(1) Whenever any person, whether or not acting under color of law, interferes by threats,
intimidation, or coercion, or attempts to interfere by threats, intimidation, or coercion, with the
exercise or enjoyment by any other person of rights secured by the State Constitution or laws of
this state, the Attorney General may bring a civil or administrative action for damages, and for
injunctive or other appropriate relief for violations of the rights secured. Any damages recovered
under this section shall accrue to the injured person. The civil action shall be brought in the
name of the state and may be brought on behalf of the injured person. The Attorney General is
entitled to an award of reasonable attorneys fees and costs if the Department of Legal Affairs
prevails in an action brought under this section.
(2) Any person who interferes by threats, intimidation, or coercion, or attempts to interfere by
threats, intimidation, or coercion, with the exercise or enjoyment by any other person of rights
secured by the State Constitution or laws of this state is liable for a civil penalty of not more than
$10,000 for each violation. This penalty may be recovered in any action brought under this
section by the Attorney General. A civil penalty so collected shall accrue to the state and shall be
deposited as received into the General Revenue Fund unallocated.
In addition, I believe the wrongful foreclose of my home involving age discrimination, civil
rights and disability discrimination gives standing under F.S. 760.20, Florida Fair Housing Act.
Many of the accusations in my complaint to the FCHR under F.S. 760.51 cite to federal law
because the U.S. Supreme Court is a federal court. In compliance with the rights secured by the
State Constitution or laws of this state provision of F.S. 760.51, please see below. I believe
the person appointment under F.S. 16.02 can provide whatever else is needed.
Please refer to the accompanying lists - one list of 22 related cases, a list of 18 Florida Bar/UPL
complaints, and a list of 8 complaints to the J udicial Qualifications Commission. Those 48 legal
proceedings each show under F.S. 760.51 violations of my constitutional rights secured by the
State Constitution or laws of this state. Under the Supremacy Clause I believe rights secured by
the Constitution and laws of the United States are included, and Treaties of the United States.
Sincerely,
Neil J . Gillespie - 8092 SW 115th Loop - Ocala Florida 34481
352-854-7807 - neilgillespie@mfi.net
See list of enclosures, and service list
State of Florida
Florida Commission on Human Relations
An Equal Opportunity Employer -Affirmative Action Employer
Rick Scott 2009 Apalachee Parkway.Suite100 Tallahassee, Florida 32301-4857 Mario Valle
Governor (850) 488-7082 Chairman
http://fchr.state.fl.us Michelle Wilson
Executive-
December 26, 2013
:rv!r. Neil J. Gillespie
8092 South West 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
Dear Mr. Gillespie:
Re: FCHR No. 201400117:
Neil J. Gillespie v. The Attorney General of Florida
The Florida Commission on Human Relations is in receipt of your inquiry concerning discrimination. Based on the
infonnation you provided, we are unable to pursue this matter further.
A complaint under Section 509.92, Section 760.10, or Sections 760.23-25, Florida Statutes, must be related to
housing, employment and/or public accommodation (hotels or restaurants).
Under these circumstances, unless you advise us within 10 days of the date of this correspondence that the
infonnation on which we have based our decision is incorrect, we will take no further action on your inquiry.
Sincerely,
o c k ~ ~
Jodi Jones
Regulatory Specialist
COMMISSIONERS
Gayle Cannon Derick Daniel Dr. Donna Elam Dr. Onelia Fajardo
Lake City Tallahassee Orlando Miami
Dr. Elena Flom Michael Keller Michell Long Gilbert Singer, Vice Chairman
Cocoa Beach Tampa Jacksonville Tampa
Billy Whitefox Stall Mario Valle, Chairman
Panama City Naples
'
......- ..... ;\, 11& a'kill IIfI U.n.nl"&'.-f* r. . ,... . ,. .................; I lin; I tlT.I'.1.:-....11'
FloridaCommission
Fl323
I
onHumanRelations
27DEt-: '2'l)'i3 PM2 L
2009ApalacheeParkwax._Suite#100
Tallahassee,Florida323<01-4830
""'-c; ........
.,

i.

,lilt
jJ
J.,
3448i ::::::1567
1/.1'1ii.l,lll iiII IIJ1iii"i IJ' iJJi j Ii" IiJJjiJj i JijIii1JIJiJI j/j 11
I
; 2 i . L 2L.. a ... I IILj
Service List December 31, 2013
Witness to Injustice for Neil J. Gillespie Witness to Injustice for Neil J. Gillespie
Gabriela Knaul, Special Rapporteur Shuaib Chalklen, Special Rapporteur on
Independence of J udges and Lawyers Disability, United Nations Enable
Office of the United Nations High Secretariat for the Convention on the Rights
Commissioner for Human Rights of Persons with Disabilities @ Department
United Nations Office at Geneva of Economic and Social Affairs
8-14 Avenue de la Paix 405 E. 42nd Street
1211 Geneva 10 Switzerland New York, NY 10017
Email: SRindependenceJ L@ohchr.org Email: enable@un.org
Governor Rick Scott Adam H. Putnam, Commissioner
Office of Governor Rick Scott Florida Dept. of Agriculture and Consumer Services
State of Florida, The Capitol Plaza Level 10, The Capitol
400 South Monroe Street 400 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0001 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0800
Email: Rick.Scott@eog.myflorida.com Email: Adam.Putnam@freshfromflorida.com
VIA UPS No. 1Z64589FP295521539 VIA UPS No. 1Z64589FP299993540
Attorney General of Florida J eff Atwater, Chief Financial Officer
Office of Attorney General State of Florida
State of Florida Florida Department of Financial Services
107 West Gaines Street 200 East Gaines Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050 Tallahassee FL 32399
Email: pam.bondi@myfloridalegal.com Email: J eff.Atwater@myfloridacfo.com
VIA UPS No. 1Z64589FP299681556 VIA UPS No. 1Z64589FP295185564
Morgan R. Bentley, Chair Virlindia A Doss, Executive Director
Florida Commission on Ethics Florida Commission on Ethics
Bentley and Bruning PA 325 J ohn Knox Road
783 S Orange Ave Ste 220 Building E, Suite 200
Sarasota, Florida 34236-4702 Tallahassee, FL 32303
Email: mbentley@bentleyandbruning.com Email: doss.virlindia@leg.state.fl.us
VIA UPS No. 1Z64589FP297105575
Gilbert Singer, Chairman
Florida Commission on Human Relations Michelle Wilson, Executive Director
Marcadis Singer PA Florida Commission on Human Relations
5104 S West Shore Blvd. 2009 Apalachee Parkway, Suite 100
Tampa, Florida 33611-5650 Tallahassee, FL 32301
Email: gsinger@marcadislaw.com E-Mail: fchrinfo@fchr.myflorida.com
Elisabeth H. Goodner, Adminstrator Michael Schneider, General Counsel
Office of the State Courts Administrator Brooke S. Kennerly, Executive Director
500 South Duval Street J udicial Qualifications Commission
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1900 1110 Thomasville Road
(850) 488-1824 Tallahassee, FL 32303-6224
Email: goodnerl@flcourts.org Email: mschneider@floridajqc.com
List of Enclosures
Letter of J odi J ones, Regulatory Specialist, FCHR No. 201400117, December 26, 2013
My complaint to the FCHR, December 10, 2013 (14 pages)
The Florida Bar File No. 2014-30,525 (9A), for Danielle Nicole Parsons, Bar ID 29364.
Unlicensed Practice of Law Investigation of Yolanda I. Martinez, Case No. 20143031(9A).
My complaint to the Florida Commission on Ethics, December 9, 2013 (14 pages)
Supplement to the Florida Commission on Ethics, December 11, 2013 (1 page cover only)
Notice, complaint No. 13-201, Pamela J o Bondi, Attorney General of Florida, Executive Branch
Notice, complaint No. 13-202, Diana R. Esposito, Chief Asst. Attorney General, Executive Branch
Notice, complaint No. 13-203, Kenneth V. Wilson, Asst. Attorney General, Executive Branch
Notice, complaint No. 13-204, Valerie Williford, Employee-Attorney General, Executive Branch
Notice, complaint No. 13-205, Laura Martin, Employee of Attorney General, Executive Branch
Notice, complaint No. 13-206, David Rowland, Gen. Counsel, Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, J udicial Branch
Notice, complaint No. 13-207, Sandra Burge, paralegal, Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, J udicial Branch
List of meritorious Complaints to The Florida Bar
List of meritorious judicial complaints made by Neil J . Gillespie
List of 22 Related legal actions to Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA, 05-CA-007205
My response to Letter of Mr. Schneider dated November 22, 2013, re Confidentiality
Meritorious Complaints to The Florida Bar by Neil J . Gillespie
Note: Partners engaged in the practice of law are each responsible for the fraud or negligence of
another partner when the later acts within the scope of the ordinary business of an attorney.
Smyrna Developers, Inc. v. Bornstein, 177 So.2d 16 (2dDCA, 1965).
1. William J . Cook RFA No. 03-18867 J une 12, 2003 (ACAP Central)
2. William J . Cook TFB No. 2004-11,734(13C) J une 7, 2004 (Tampa Branch)
3. William J . Cook TFB No. 2006-11,194 (13D) March 6, 2006 (Tampa Branch)
4. William J . Cook TFB No. 2007-10,004 (13D) J une 27, 2006 (Tampa Branch)
5. Ryan Christopher Rodems TFB No. 2007-11,162(13D) February 20, 2007 (Tampa Branch)
6. Chris A. Barker TFB No. 2007-11,792(13A) J une 18, 2007 (Tampa Branch)
7. Ryan Christopher Rodems File not opened/no number J une 20, 2007 (Tampa Branch)
8. Troy Matthew Lovell File not opened/no number J une 20, 2007 (Tampa Branch)
9. Robert W. Bauer TFB No. 2011-00,073 (8B) J uly 15, 2010 (ACAP Central)
10. Seldon J . Childers RFA No. 11-4718 August 25, 2010 (ACAP Central)
11. Eugene P. Castagliuolo TFB No. 2013-10,162 (6D) August 17, 2012 (ACAP Central)
12. Ryan Christopher Rodems TFB No. 2013-10,271 (13E) Sep-13, 2012 (ACAP Central)
13. Robert W. Bauer TFB No. 2013-00,540 (8B) J anuary 7, 2013 (ACAP Central)
14. Ryan Christopher Rodems, complaint submitted J anuary 4, 2013. Complaint was quietly
incorporated without notice with TFB No. 2013-10,271 (13E) Sep-13, 2012 and dismissed.
15. Catherine Barbara Chapman, RFA No. 13-12194, J anuary 18, 2013 (ACAP Central)
16. Ryan Christopher Rodems, UPL Complaint filed November 25, 2013, Lori Holcomb refused
to process the complaint as UPL. Sent to ACAP as RFA No. 14-9913 Shanell M. Schuyler.
No more ACAP for Mr. Rodems, requested UPL complaint returned.
17. Yolanda I. Martinez, UPL Investigation No. 20143031(9A), December 5, 2013 (Orlando UPL)
18. Danielle Nicole Parsons, TFB File No. 2014-30,525 (9A), December 6, 2013 (ACAP Central)
J udicial Qualifications Commission
Meritorious judicial complaints made by Neil J . Gillespie
Each complaint was corruptly dismissed by the J QC (except no. 8, pending)
Two right-to-sue letters for J udge Claudia Rickert Isom were provided by the J QC
J udge Isoms misconduct was rewarded with the 2013 Distinguished J udicial Service
Award presented by Chief J ustice Ricky Polston J an. 31 at the Florida Supreme Court.
Note: For typical consumers of legal and court services, judicial complaints, like bar complaints,
generally do not provide a consumer useful relief if approved, and are almost always dismissed.
1. Docket No. 10495 (2010) - October 5, 2010 complaint for J udge Martha J ean Cook.
2. Docket No. 11375 (2011) - August 17, 2011 complaint for J udge Martha J ean Cook.
3. Docket No. 12385 (2012) - August 15, 2012 complaint for J udge Claudia Rickert Isom
4. Docket No. 12554 (2012) - November 26, 2012 complaint, J udge Martha J ean Cook.
5. Docket No. 13421 (2013) - August 21, 2013 complaint for J udge Martha J ean Cook
6. Docket No. 13527 (2013) - October 17, 2013 complaint for J udge Claudia Rickert Isom
7. Docket No. 13573 (2013) - November 20, 2013 complaint for J udge Martha J ean Cook
8. Docket No. (2013) - December 19, 2013 complaint for Chief J udge Menendez
1. Docket No. 10495 (2010) - October 5, 2010 complaint for J udge Martha J ean Cook.
Misconduct, outrageous behavior, racketeering, honest services fraud.
J QC anonymous, unsigned dismissal letter November 22, 2010
The Commission does not have authority to disqualify a judge from a case or to order that a new
judge be assigned to a case. Any such request must be made through the normal court process.
The Commission has no authority to act as an appellate court. It cannot review, reverse or vacate
a judge's decision or sentence. Such concerns must be handled through the normal court process.
My response letter J anuary 6, 2011 to J QC Executive Director Brooke Kennerly. J udge Cook
recused once I filed removal petition 2D10-5529; J udge Cook wrongly denied five motions
to disqualify so she could make rulings favorable to Rodems; case was on appeal 2D10-5197.
Standard dismissal letter J anuary 7, 2011 by J QC Counsel Michael Schneider
In response to your letter of J anuary 6, 2011, please be advised that the Commission
completed its review of your complaint in the above matter and determined, at its
meeting held on Thursday, November 18, 2010, that the concerns you have expressed are
not violations of the Code of Conduct warranting further action by the Commission.
The purpose of the Commission is to determine the existence of judicial misconduct and
disability as defined by the Constitution and the laws of the State of Florida. If such
misconduct or disability is found, the Commission can recommend disciplinary action to
2
the Florida Supreme Court. The Commission has found no basis for further action on
your complaint that therefore has been dismissed.
2. Docket No. 11375 (2011) - August 17, 2011 complaint for J udge Martha J ean Cook.
Media reported conflict with family bank business and hearing foreclosure cases, J udge Cook
refused to recuse. J udge Cook was administratively transferred to criminal court.
Standard dismissal letter September 13, 2011 by J QC Counsel Michael Schneider.
3. Docket No. 12385 (2012) - August 15, 2012 complaint for J udge Claudia Rickert Isom. Lied in
open court during a conflict-check hearing, failed to disclose husband once practiced law with my lawyer.
Denied disability accommodation. Corruptly remained on the case to make rulings favorable to Rodems.
Right to sue letter October 10, 2012 by J QC Counsel Michael Schneider:
The Commission has completed its review of your complaint in the above matter and has
determined, at its meeting held on Friday, October 5, 2012, that the concerns you have
expressed are not allegations involving a breach of the Code of J udicial Conduct
warranting further action by the Commission but are matters for review solely through
the court system.
4. Docket No. 12554 (2012) - November 26, 2012 complaint, J udge Martha Cook. No authorship
by J udge Cook in a final summary judgment order signed and entered by the J udge without reading the
order. Mr. Rodems wrote the order as part of an honest services fraud.
Standard dismissal letter J anuary 24, 2013 by J QC Counsel Michael Schneider.
5. Docket No. 13421 (2013) - August 21, 2013 complaint for J udge Martha J ean Cook, failed
to follow the holding in Rogers v. State, 630 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 1993), that requires a judge provide a
reasonable amount of time to reduce a spoken motion to disqualify to writing. I had just found this
case and made a complaint based only on Rogers v. State, one the J QC has relied upon in the past.
Initially Executive Director Kennerly corruptly refused to process my complaint, and sent me a
letter dated August 30, 2013 on the basis of falsehoods and wrong case details intended to
confuse me. I responded by letter September 5, 2013 and refuted Ms. Kennerlys wrongdoing.
J QC Counsel Michael Schneider responded September 9, 2013,
Although your concerns appear to have been previously addressed, the matter will be
resubmitted to the Investigative Panel for their determination.
3
Standard dismissal letter October 10, 2013 by J QC Counsel Michael Schneider.
6. Docket No. 13527 (2013) - October 17, 2013 complaint for J udge Claudia Rickert Isom.
This complaint concerned J udge Isoms violation of the Constitution of the State of Florida,
Article V, Section 13; failure to disclose multiple Interests In Specified Businesses on the
Form 6 Full and Public Disclosure of Financial Interests, Section E; failure to disclose an
ownership interest in a high performance aircraft; likely tax evasion through WCAT, INC.; and
concealment of the real purpose and use of WCAT, INC., the high performance aircraft, and
purpose for failing to disclose this information.
Right to sue letter December 10, 2013 by J QC Counsel Michael Schneider:
The Commission has completed its review of your complaint in the above matter and has
determined, at its meeting held on Thursday, December 5, 2013, that the concerns you
have expressed are not allegations involving a breach of the Code of J udicial Conduct
warranting further action by the Commission but are matters for review through the
normal court process.
So now I have two (2) right-to-sue letters for J udge Claudia Rickert Isom.
7. Docket No. 13573 (2013) - November 20, 2013 complaint for J udge Martha J ean Cook,
for corruptly-entered Order Prohibiting Plaintiff [Neil J . Gillespie] From Appearing Pro Se.
Although this case was closed over two years ago, J udge Cooks sham order is being used
against me today by Ryan Christopher Rodems as part of a vexatious Unlicensed Practice of Law
(UPL) Complaint made by Rodems against me.
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. Specifically, J udge Cooks family bank was about to fail in 2009 under FDIC order
until a Brazilian billionaire pumped tens-of-millions of dollars in the community bank.
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.
Standard dismissal letter December 10, 2013 by J QC Counsel Michael Schneider.
4
8. Docket No. ____(2013) - December 19, 2013 complaint, Chief J udge Manuel Menendez
Respondent David A. Rowland, General Counsel for Respondent Thirteenth J udicial Circuit
Florida, concocted with others a fraud to falsely portray to Kenneth Wilson, Florida Assistant
Attorney General, that I did not serve Mr. Rowland my petition as I certified under Supreme
Court Rule 29. Mr. Wilson claims he relied on Rowlands fraud, and did not submit a brief in
opposition due the Supreme Court J anuary 14, 2013.
Without a response, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi denied me due process under the Fifth
and Fourteenth Amendments. The U.S. Supreme Court relies on opposition briefs as part of its
adversarial process to properly litigate and decide a petition. Floridas opposition brief was due
J anuary 14, 2013. AG Bondi did not respond for Florida, thus no opposition brief was distributed
for the Supreme Courts Conference February 15, 2013.
Laura Rush, OSCA, informed me that under Article V, section 2(d), Florida Constitution, the
circuit chief judge is the administrative head of the circuit, responsible for the administrative
supervision of the circuit courts and county courts in his circuit. Therefore I believe J udge
Menendez was involved in the fraud or impairment of Petition No. 12-7747, if not the ringleader.
Cal Goodlett, General Counsel's Office, Office of the State Courts Administrator, identified
J udge Menendez as the Records Custodian for Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, FL. Rule 2.420(b)(3).
On August 15, 2013 I made a records request to J udge Menendez (enclosed), that stated:
This is my third request for public records. Two prior requests were met with false and
misleading responses from Sandra Burge, a purported "paralegal assistant".
Please delegate the task of responding to this records request to a competent person, not
someone who was part of the scheme to falsely portray to Kenneth Wilson, Florida
A.S.A., that I did not serve Mr. Rowland my petition per U.S. Supreme Court Rule 29.
That list of persons includes Rowland, Burge, Chris Nauman, and perhaps others...
Contrary to my request to J udge Menendez that Mr. Rowland not be involved in providing records,
a response August 30, 2013 from Rowland stating Chief J udge Menendez directed me to respond
to your August 15, 2013 public records request.
The Thirteenth J udicial Circuit was 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, or conflict of interest.
J udge Menendez does not operate the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit in a fair and unbiased manner.
Menendez must be removed from office. He is not able to perform his duty as chief judge in an
effective and expeditious manner. J udge Menendez has engaged in a wide range of misconduct
as shown here. This complaint shows the existence of judicial misconduct and disability by
J udge Menendez as defined by the Constitution and the laws of the State of Florida. Menendez
must be removed from office to uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary.
22 Related legal actions to Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA, 05-CA-007205
RCR - denotes cases where Ryan Christopher Rodems represented his firm and partner against former client Gillespie
1.RCR Hillsborough Co. 05-CA-7205, Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A., Aug-11-2005 to
J un-21-2011, (Mr. Bauer appeared for Gillespie April 2, 2007 through October 1, 2009).
2.RCR Hillsborough Co. 05-CA-7205, Vexatious libel counterclaim, BRC v. Gillespie, J an-19-2006
to Sep-28-2010, (Mr. Bauer appeared for Gillespie April 2, 2007 - October 1, 2009)
3.RCR 2dDCA, 2D06-3803: Gillespie v. BRC, discovery related appeal (Gillespie pro se) (closed)
4.RCR 2dDCA, 2D07-4530: BRC v. Gillespie, voluntary dismissal (Mr. Bauer for Gillespie) (closed)
5.RCR 2dDCA, 2D08-2224: Gillespie v. BRC, 57.105 sanctions (Mr. Bauer for Gillespie) (closed)
6. RCR 2dDCA, 2D10-5197: Gillespie v. BRC, appeal final summary judgment (Gillespie pro se) (closed)
7. RCR 2dDCA, 2D10-5529: Gillespie v. BRC, prohibition, remove J udge Cook (Gillespie pro se) (closed)
8. RCR 2dDCA, 2D11-2127: Gillespie v. BRC, prohibition/venue, J udge Arnold (Gillespie pro se) (closed)
9. RCR Fla.Sup.Ct. SC11-858: Gillespie v. BRC, habeas corpus, prohibition (Gillespie pro se) (closed)
10.RCR Fla.Sup.Ct. SC11-1622: Gillespie v. BRC, mandamus, other relief (Gillespie pro se) (closed)
11.RCR Federal Ct. 5:10-cv-503: Gillespie v. Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, Fla., Civil Rights/ADA (closed; Scotus)
12. Federal Ct. 5:11-cv-539: Estate/Gillespie v. Thirteenth J ud. Cir., FL., Hobbs Act, Title 15, 1983, ADA, etc.
13. C.A.11, 12-11028-B: Estate/Gillespie v. Thirteenth J ud. Cir., FL., Hobbs Act, Title 15, 1983, ADA, etc.
14.RCR C.A.11, 12-11213-C: Gillespie v. Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, Fla., Civil Rights, ADA, (closed;Scotus)
15.RCR SCOTUS Rule 22 Application, J ustice Thomas May 31, 2011, not docketed. (Gillespie pro se)
Emergency Petition for Stay or Injunction, re: Supreme Court of Florida SC11-858
16.RCR SCOTUS Rule 22 Application, J ustice Thomas J une 11, 2011, not docketed. (Gillespie pro se)
Extraordinary Writ of Prohibition, re: Supreme Court of Florida SC11-858
17.RCR SCOTUS Petition for Writ of Certiorari August 20, 2012 review Fla.Sup.Ct. case no. SC11-1622,
Returned August 23, 2012 because the petition was determined out-of-time.
18.RCR SCOTUS Rule 13.5 Application to J ustice Thomas, docketed August 13, 2012, No. 12A215
19.RCR SCOTUS Petition for Writ of Certiorari No. 12-7747, December 10, 2012, C.A.11 12-11028, 12-11213
20. SCOTUS Petition for Writ of Certiorari No. 13-7280, November 8, 2013, C.A.11 13-11858-B
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21. Original Case 99-2795-CIV-T-26C, Gillespie, Clement, Blomefield v. AMSCOT, December 9, 1999
22. Original Appeal 01-14761-AA, Gillespie, Clement, Blomefield v. AMSCOT Corp., August 20, 2001
MorganR. Bentley
Chair
MichelleAnchors
MatthewF. Carlucci
I.MartinFord
Tom Freeman
SusanHorovitzMaurer
LindaMcKeeRobison
StanleyM.Weston
StateofFlorida
COMMISSIONONETHICS
P.O.Drawer15709
Tallahassee,Florida32317-5709
325JohnKnoxRoad
BuildingE,Suite200
Tallahassee,Florida32303
"A Public Office is a Public Trust"
December17,2013
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
TheHonorablePamelaBondi
PL-O1,TheCapitol
Confidential
Tallahassee,FL 32399-1050
RE: ComplaintNo. 13-201,InrePAMELAJOBONDI
DearAttorneyGeneralBondi:
Theabove-captionedcomplaint,recentlyreceivedintheofficeoftheCommissiononEthics,is
beingtransmittedtoyoupursuanttotherequirementsofSection112.324,FloridaStatutes. This
officewillforwardallfuture correspondenceinthismattertoyouattheabove-listedmailing
addressunlessotherwisenotifiedofachangeinyouraddress. Thistransmittalisaroutine
administrativerequirementwhichshouldnotbeconstruedasanapproval,disapproval,or
judgment of the complaint, either as toits terminology or merits.
Pleasenotethatthiscomplaint,aswellasallof theCommission'sproceedingsandrecords
relatingtothecomplaint,remainconfidentialeitheruntilyoumakeawrittenrequesttothe
Commissionthatsuchrecordsbemadepublicoruntilthecomplaintreachesastagein the
Commission'sproceedingswhereitbecomespublic. Unlesswereceiveawrittenwaiverof
confidentialityfromyou,ourofficeisnotfreetoreleaseanydocumentsortocommentonthis
complainttomembersofthepublicorthepress,solongasthecomplaintremainsina
confidentialstage. TheCommission'sproceduresonconfidentialitydonotgoverntheactionsof
thecomplainantortherespondent.
Thefollowinginformationissubmittedtoaidyouinunderstandingthereviewthatacomplaint
maygothroughundertheCommission'srules. Thefirststageinourcomplaintprocessisa
determinationof whethertheallegationsof thecomplaintarelegallysufficient,thatis,whether
they indicate a possible violationof any law over which the Commission has jurisdiction. If the
complaintisfoundnottobelegallysufficient,theCommissionwillorderthatthecomplaintbe
dismissedwithoutinvestigationandallrecordsrelatingtothecomplaintwillbecomepublicat
thattime.
PAMELA JO BONDI
Page 2
December 17, 2013
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 errores) 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 ofthe 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 aIld, 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.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.

Virlindia Doss
Executive Director
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Neil J. Gillespie Complainant
MorganR.Bentley
Chair
MichelleAnchors
MatthewF.Carlucci
I.MartinFord
TomFreeman
SusanHorovitzMaurer
LindaMcKeeRobison
StanleyM. Weston
StateofFlorida
COMMISSIONONETIDCS
P.o.Drawer15709
325JohnKnoxRoad
BuildingE,Suite200
December17,2013
VirlindiaDoss
Executive Director
General CounseV
(850)488-7864Phone
(850)488-3077(FAX)
CERTIFIEDMAIL
Ms.DianaR. Esposito
501 E. KennedyBlvd.,Ste. 1100
Tampa,FL 33602
Confidential
RE: ComplaintNo. 13-202,In reDIANAR. ESPOSITO
DearMs.Esposito:
Theabove-captionedcomplaint,recentlyreceivedintheofficeof theCommissiononEthics,is
officewillforwardallfuture correspondenceinthismattertoyouattheabove-listedmailing
addressunlessotherwisenotifiedof achangeinyouraddress. Thistransmittalisaroutine
judgmentof thecomplaint,eitherastoitsterminologyormerits.
Commissionthatsuchrecordsbemadepublicoruntilthecomplaintreachesastageinthe
confidentialityfronlyou,ourofficeisnotfreetoreleaseanydocumentsortocomnlentonthis
complainttomembersof thepublicorthepress,solongasthecomplaintremainsina
Thefollowinginfonnationissubmittedtoaidyouinunderstandingthereviewthatacomplaint
maygothroughundertheCommission'srules. Thefirststageinourcompl,aintprocessisa
theyindicateapossibleviolationofanylawoverwhichtheCommissionhasjurisdiction. If the
thattime. ~ > ...-
DIANA R. ESPOSITO
Page 2
December 17, 2013
financial disclosure fonns, a determination will be made as to whether the errores) or
omissions(s) are significant to investigate. If the error(s) or omissions(s) are detennined to be
by the investigative staff ofthe Commission. The next stage of the Commission's proceedings
If the Commission fmds that there is no probable cause to believe that there has been a violation
requires that the Commission decide whether the law actually was violated and, if so, whether a
(trial) at which evidence would be presented, or the Commission may order tllat such a hearing
occurred.
to access our website at www.ethics.state.t1.us. where you will find publications, rules, and other
infonnation. If there are any questions concerning this complaint or the procedures being

Virlindia Doss
Executive Director
Enclosure
MorganR.Bentley
Chair
MichelleAnchors
MatthewF.Carlucci
I.MartinFord
TomFreeman
SusanHorovitzMaurer
LindaMcKeeRobison
StanleyM.Weston
Stateof Florida
COMMISSIONONETHICS
P.O.Drawer15709
325JohnKnoxRoad
BuildingE,Suite200
December17,2013
VirlindiaDoss
Executive Director
General CounseV
(850)488-7864Phone
(850)488-3077(FAX)
CERTIFIEDMAIL
Mr. KennethV. Wilson
CivilLitigationBureau
501 E. KennedyBlvd.
Confidential
Tampa,FL 33602
RE: ComplaintNo. 13-203,In reKENNETHV. WILSON
DearMr.Wilson:
beingtransmittedtoyoupursuanttotherequirenlentsofSection112.324,FloridaStatutes. This
officewillforwardallfuturecorrespondenceinthismattertoyouattheabove-listedmailing
determinationof whethertheallegationsofthecomplaintarelegallysufficient,thatis,whether
theyindicateapossibleviolationof anylawoverwhichtheCommissionhasjurisdiction. If the
thattime.
Kenneth V. Wilson
Page 2
December 17, 2013
financial disclosure forms, a determination will be made as to whether the errores) or
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 ofthe ethics
of the ethics laws, the conlplaint will be dismissed and will become public at that time.
occurred.
/-

Virlindia Doss
Executive Director
Enclosure
MorganR.Bentley
Chair
MichelleAnchors
MatthewF.Carlucci
I. MartinFord
TomFreeman
SusanHorovitzMaurer
LindaMcKeeRobison
StanleyM. Weston
StateofFlorida
COMMISSIONONETHICS
P.O.Drawer15709
325JohnKnoxRoad
BuildingE,Suite200
December17,2013
VirlindiaDoss
Executive Director
General CounseV
(850)488-7864Phone
(850)488-3077(FAX)
CERTIFIEDMAIL
Ms.ValerieWilliford
Tampa,FL 33602
Confidential
RE: ComplaintNo. 13-204,In reVALERIEWILLIFORD
DearMs. Williford:
determination of whether the allegationsofthe complaint arelegally sufficient, that is,whether
dismissedwithoutinvestigationandallrecordsrelatingtothecomplaintwillbeconlepublicat
thattime.
VALERIE WILLIFORD
Page 2
December 17, 2013
financial disclosure forms, a determination will be made as to whether the error(s) or
occurred.
/, r)

Virlindia Doss
Executive Director
Enclosure
MorganR. Bentley
Chair
MichelleAnchors
MatthewF.Carlucci
I.MartinFord
TomFreeman
SusanHorovitzMaurer
LindaMcKeeRobison
StanleyM.Weston
StateofFlorida
COMMISSIONONETHICS
P.O.Drawer15709
325JohnKnoxRoad
BuDdingE,Suite200
December17,2013
VirlindiaDoss
Executive Director
General CounseV
(850)488-7864Phone
(850)488-3077(FAX)
CERTIFIEDMAIL
Ms.LauraMartin
Confidential
Tampa,FL 33602
RE: ComplaintNo. 13-205,InreLAURAMARTIN
DearMs.Martin:
determination of whether the allegationsof the complaint arelegally sufficient, that is, whether
thattime.
LAURA MARTIN
Page 2
December 17, 2013
involves the prelinlinary investigation of the complaint and a decision by the Commission of
ofthe ethics laws, the complaint will be dismissed-and will become public at that time.
occurred.
Sincerely, ~
r ~ ~
Virlindia Doss
Executive Director
Enclosure
MorganR.Bentley
Chair
MichelleAnchors
MatthewF.Carlucci
I.MartinFord
TomFreeman
SusanHorovitzMaurer
LindaMcKeeRobison
StanleyM.Weston
StateofFlorida
COMMISSIONONETIDCS
P.O.Drawer15709
325JohnKnoxRoad
BuildingE,Suite200
December17,2013
VirlindiaDoss
Executive Director
General CounseV
(850)488-7864Phone
(850)488-3077(FAX)
CERTIFIEDMAIL
RETURN RECEIPTREQUESTED
Mr.DavidA.Rowland
800E. TwiggsSt.,Ste.603
Tampa,FL 33602
Confidential
RE: ComplaintNo. 13-206,In reDAVIDA.ROWLAND
DearMr.Rowland:
Pleasenotethatthiscomplaint,aswellasalloftheCommission'sproceedingsandrecords
thattime.
DAVID A. ROWLAND
Page 2
December 17, 2013
omissions(s) are significant to investigate. If the errores) or omissions(s) are determined to be
correction is nlade, the complaint will advance to the next step in the process.
ofthe ethics laws, the complaint will be dismissed and will become public at that time.
occurred.
to access our website at www.ethics.state.f1.us. where you will find publications, rules, and other
Sincerely, ~
~ o J h
Virlindia Doss
Executive Director
Enclosure
MorganR.Bentley
Chair
MichelleAnchors
MatthewF.Carlucci
I. MartinFord
TomFreeman
SusanHorovitzMaurer
LindaMcKeeRobison
StanleyM.Weston
StateofFlorida
COMMISSIONONETHICS
P.O.Drawer15709
325JohnKnoxRoad
BuildingE,Suite200
December17,2013
VirlindiaDoss
Executive Director
General CounseV
(850)488-7864Phone
(850)488-3077(FAX)
CERTIFIEDMAIL
Ms.SandraBurge
800E. TwiggsSt.,Ste.603
Confidential
Tampa,FL 33602
RE: ComplaintNo. 13-207,In re SANDRABURGE
DearMs. Burge:
addressunlessotherwisenotifiedofachangeinyouraddress. ThistransmittalisarOlltine
determination of whether theallegationsofthecomplaintarelegallysufficient,thatis,whether
thattime.
SANDRA BURGE
Page 2
December 17, 2013
by the investigative staff ofthe Commission. The next stage of the Commission's proceedings
occurred.
You are entitled to be represented by legal cOWlsel during our proceedings. Upon written
Sincerely,
~ ~
Virlindia Doss
Executive Director
Enclosure
VIA V.P.S. No. lZ64589FNY94633807 December 10, 2013
Michelle Wilson, Executive Director
Florida Con1mission on Human Relations
2009 Apalachee Parkway, Suite 100
Tallahassee, FL 32301 RE: New Complaint Enclosed
Dear Ms. Wilson:
Please find enclosed my complaint for civil rights violations and disability discrimination against
the persons and entities shown below.
1. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General of Florida
2. Diana R. Esposito, the Chief-Assistant Attorney General, Tampa
3. Kenneth V. Wilson, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa
4. Valerie Williford, employee of the Office of Attorney General, Tampa
5. Laura Martin, employee of the Office of Attorney General, Tampa
6. David A. Rowland, General Counsel, Thirteenth Judicial Circuit Florida
7. Sandra Burge, employee of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit Florida
8. Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Florida; Chief Judge Manuel Menendez Jr.
9. Claudia Rickert Isom, Circuit Judge
10. James M. Barton, II, Circuit Judge
11. Martha J. Cook, Circuit Judge
12. Gonzalo B. Casares, ADA Coordinator, Thirteenth Judicial Circuit Florida
13. Barker, Roden1s & Cook, P.A.
14. Ryan Christopher Rodems, Florida attorney
15. The Law Office of Robert W. Bauer, P.A.
16. Robert W. Bauer, Florida attorney
17. Eugene P. Castagliuolo, Florida attorney
18. Elisabeth Goodner, State Court Adminstrator
19. Laura Rush, General Counsel, Office of State Court Adminstrator
20. The Florida Bar, John F. Harkness, Executive Director, et al.
21. McCalla Raymer LLC, et al.
Also enclosed are a number of supporting exhibits. Thank you.
Gillespl
8692 SW 11 th Loop
Ocala, Florida 34481
Telephone: (352) 854-7807
En1ail: neilgillespie@mfi.net
TECHNICALASSISTANCEQUESTIONNAIRE
Your answers to this questionnaire are confidential pursuant to Florida Statute 760.11 (12)
I,NeilJ.Gillespie,herebywaiveconfidentiality;thedocumentsprovidedarepublic
recordsofandaboutcourtproceedings.
1. EstablishingJurisdiction:
a. Whatis today'sdate?12/10/2013
b. Whatis thenlostrecentorlastdatethatanallegeddiscriminatoryactoccurredagainstyou
bytheestablishnlentyouarefiling aclaimagainst? ONGOING;todaywithOSCA,seebelow.
TodayIreceivedemailfromLauraRush, GeneralCounsel,OfficeoftheStateCourtsAdnlinistrator,
refusingto providedisabilityaccommodationgettingrecordsfromtheThirteenthJudicialCircuit.
Theemailis enclosed. Ms. RushandtheOSCArefusedto complywithF.S. 282.601-282.606
AccessibilityofInformationandTechnology,andtheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct(ADA),and
theRehabilitationActof1973,etc.,etc. anyandallotherdisabilitylaw.
TheStateofFloridahasahistoryofcivilrightsviolationsanddisabilitydiscriminationtowardme
beginningwiththeFLDiv. VocationalRehabilitation(DVR). ImadeacomplaintDVRin 1998,
whichis enclosedwithmylettertoPres. JimmyCarterofOctober25,2013.Igotaresponsefronl
FCHROctober31,2013 whichis enclosed,togetherwithmyletterto FCHRofSeptember30,2013.
2. ContactInformation:
a. Name:NeilJ. Gillespie
MailingAddress: 8092 SW 115thLoop,OcalaFlorida34481
ZipCode: 34481 City: Ocala County: Marion State: Florida
b. Ifyouwantustocontactyoubye-mail,pleaseprovideyoure-mailaddress: neilgillespie@mfi.net
c. HomePhone: (352)854-7807 WorkPhone: N/A
CellPhone: decline DateofBirth: 03/19/1956
d. If youwillberepresentedbyanattorney,pleaseprovidetheattorney'snameandphonenumber:
Name: noattorney
e. Pleaseprovidethenameandtelephonenumberofan individualwhodoesnotlivewithyoubut
wouldknowhowto reachyou:
Name: Dr. KarinHuffer,3236MountainSpringRoad,LasVegas,NV89146;Tel. 702-528-9588,
Email: legalabuse@gn1ail.con1
f. HaveyoufiledacomplaintofdiscriminationwiththeFCHR,EEOC,HUD,oranylocalagency
withinthelastyear? Ifyes,completebelow:
AgencyName: N/A
3. BasisforDiscrimination
a. Onwhatbasisdoyoubelieveyouwerediscriminatedagainst? Pleasecheckonlytheboxorboxesthatapplyto
yourchargeofdiscrimination
RACE:
COLOR:
NATIONALORIGIN
SEX
CREED
)(PHYSICALDISABILITY/HANDICAP
b. Intheboxbelow,provideadescriptionoftheallegeddiscriminatoryactoractsthatthe
establishmenttookagainstyou. Yourdescriptionshouldincludethefollowing:
1. Whathappened,whotooktheactionsagainstyou,andwhen(whatdates)theactions
occurred. Ongoingdenialofdisabilityaccommodation,violationofCivilRights, chapter825 FS,
AbuseNeglect,ExploitationofElderlyPersonsandDisabledAdults.
FraudorimpairmentofmyPetitionNo. 12-7747totheU.S. SupremeCourt(fordenialofdisability
accomn10dation, civilrights,disabilityrights),alegitimategovernmentactivity, 18U.S.C. 371,by
AttorneyGeneralPamBondiandothersinheremploy,whoconspiredwithRespondentDavidA.
Rowland,GeneralCounselforRespondentThirteenthJudicialCircuitFlorida,andotherRespondents
andnon-respondents,inaconspiracyagainstmyrights, 18 U.S.C. 241,to deprivemeof rights
undercoloroflaw, 18 U.S.C. 242.ADA: 42USC12202- A Stateshallnotbein1mune.
AttorneyGeneralBondietal arecurrentlyengagedinongoingMisuseofPublicPositioninPetition
No. 13-7280totheU.S. Supren1eCourt,whereTheFloridaBaris across-partyforpolitical
persecutionofmeinretaliationformyPetitionNo. 12-7747to theGovernmentforaredressof
grievancesprotectedbytheFirstAmendment;ADA: 42USC 12202- A Stateshallnotbeimmune;
ADA: 42USC12203 - Prohibitionagainstretaliationandcoercion;under760.51 F.S. Violationsof
constitutionalrights,theFloridaAttorneyGeneralhadauthorityanddutyto representmebutdidnot.
Enclosedyouwillfindthefollowing documents: PetitionNo. 12-7747totheU.S. SupremeCourt,andguide
PetitionNo. 13-7280totheU.S. SupremeCourt; ComplainttotheFloridaCon1missiononEthics
UrgentAppealtotheUnitedNations,withtwo Supportingaffidavits
ConsolidatedAmendedMotionforDisabilityAccommodation,DeclaratoryRelief,Waive
Confidentiality;NoticeE-filingProhibitionbyDistrictCourt;Affidavitof Conflict,ADAdenial
c. Inthe boxbelow, identify any customers who havebeenin the same situationas
you, butweretreatedmorefavorablybecausetheyhaveadifferentprotectedclass thanyou
(Forexample,theyareadifferentrace,sex,nationalorigin,etc.). Provideabriefdescription
ofhowtheseemployeesweretreateddifferentlythanyou. Unknown.
Attachedis aletterfromDr. KarinHuffer,whowasmyAmericanswithDisabilityAct(ADA)
advocate. Dr. I-Iuffermaybeabletoprovidethisinfoffi1ation. Address: 3236MountainSpringRoad,
LasVegas,NV89146;Tel. 702-528-9588,Email: legalabuse@gmail.com
2
4. ContactInformation:
Providethenameofthebusinessyouarefilingthisclaimagainst.
TheAttorneyGeneralofFloridaetal, theThirteenthJudicialCircuitetatandthe Defendants/Respondentsin
PetitionNo. 12-7747andPetitionNo. 13-7280,personsnamedinthecomplainttothe FloridaCommissionon
Ethics,ElisabethGoodner, StateCourtAdministrator, andLauraRush,GeneralCounsel,Officeofthe
StateCourtsAdministrator; andcross-partyTheFloridaBarinPetitionNo. 13-7280.
McCallaRaymerLLC,225 E. RobinsonSt., Suite660, Orlando,FL32801,Respondent,Petition 13-7280
NOTE:McCallaRaymerLLC,aForeignLimitedLiabilityCompany,isshowing"Inactive"status
ontheFloridaDivisionofCorp. website,"ADMINDISSOLUTIONFORANNUALREPORT"
Providethenameof theHumanResourcesOfficeorothermanagementlevelcontactpersonforthis business.
PamBondiAG; CJManuelMenendezJr., 13thCircuit; JohnHarkness,FloridaBar,ElisabethGoodner,OSCA.
MartyStone,manageretal forMcCallaRaymerLLC,seeattached2012AnnualReport.
Mailingaddressofthebusiness: FLAttorneyGeneral, 101 W. GainesStreet,CollinsBldg,TallahasseeFL
ThirteenthJudicialCircuitFlorida, 800E. TwiggsStreet,Suite603,Tampa,Florida33602
Officeofthe StateCourtsAdministrator,500SouthDuvalStreet,Tallahassee,FL32399-1900
TheFloridaBar,651 E. JeffersonStreet,Tallahassee,FL32399-2300
McCallaRaymerLLC,225 E. RobinsonSt., Suite660,Orlando,FL32801
I understand that information on this questionnaire may be shared, in whole or part, by the
Florida Commission on Human Relations with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission and theRespondent indicated. With theexception ofthese parties, this information
willbekeptconfidential.
I unde tand,agreeandrequestCommissionassistance

(Date)
I,NeilJ.Gillespie,herebywaiveconfidentiality;thedocumentsprovidedarepublicrecordsofand
aboutcourtproceedings.
Pleaseprintoutandmailorfax to:
FloridaCommissiononHumanRelations
2009ApalacheeParkway,Suite200
Telephone(850)488-7082
Facsimile(850)488-5291
3

Neil Gillespie
From: "Laura Rush" <RushL@flcourts.org>
To: "'Neil Gillespie'" <neilgillespie@mfi.net>
Sent: Monday, December 09, 2013 12:47 PM
Subject: RE: Disability accommodation request, assistance getting public records from the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit
Page 1of 5
12/10/2013
Dear Mr. Gillespie,

This e-mail responds to your December 5, 2013, request for assistance in obtaining public records within the custody of the Thirteenth
J udicial Circuit as a disability accommodation, presumably under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Pursuant to Title II of the ADA, the Office of the State Courts Administrator will make reasonable modifications in policies, practices,
and procedures; furnish auxiliary aids and services; and afford program accessibility through the provision of accessible facilities, the relocation
of services or programs, or the provision of services at alternative sites, as appropriate and necessary.

However, no provision of Title II of the ADA requires the Office of the State Courts Administrator to provide legal advice or counsel, or
administrative assistance, as a disability accommodation.

Therefore, for the reasons stated here and in my November 22, 2013, e-mail to you, the Office of the State Courts Administrator will not
assist you with your records request to the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit.

Sincerely,
Laura Rush
General Counsel
Office of the State Courts Administrator
500 South Duval Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1900
(850) 488-1824

From: Neil Gillespie [mailto:neilgillespie@mfi.net]
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2013 10:25 AM
To: osca; Lisa Goodner; Laura Rush; Cal Goodlett; Special Rapporteur Gabriela Knaul; Shuaib Chalklen Special Rapporteur Disability; InfoDesk UN Geneva;
Hyacinthe Medenou; Gianni Magazzeni UN Geneva; Eunice Ajambo; Revi Kumar; Css Intern1 Ohchr; Eugene K. Pettis; Gregory W. Coleman; J ack Harkness;
Paul Hill; J ohn Thomas Berry; Kenneth Lawrence Marvin; Mary Ellen Bateman; William Abbuehl; USAFLM.State.Foreclosures@usdoj.gov; Tiffany Caparas2;
Tiffany Caparas1; McCalla Raymer E-service; Hon. Hale Ralph Stancil; Gregory J ones; AG Pamela J o Bondi; Bridget Kellogg Smitha; Renee Elise Thompson;
Patricia Moring; J ohnnye Ladine Friedrich; Barbara Burke; neilgillespie@mfi.net
Subject: Fw: Disability accommodation request, assistance getting public records from the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit

Elisabeth Goodner, State Courts Administrator
(850) 488-1824

RE: Disability accommodation request, assistance getting public records from the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit

Dear Ms. Goodner,

When can I expect a response to my request for disability accommodation, made to your counsel Laura Rush shown below, assistance getting
public records from the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit?

Time is of the essence. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Neil J . Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Telephone: (352) 854-7807
Email: neilgillespie

----- Original Message -----
From: Neil Gillespie
To: Laura Rush ; Elisabeth Goodner ; Cal Goodlett
Cc: J ohn Anthony Tomasino ; neilgillespie@mfi.net
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 10:12 PM
Subject: Disability accommodation request, assistance getting public records from the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit

Laura Rush
General Counsel
(850) 488-1824

RE: Disability accommodation request, assistance getting public records from the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit
Dear Ms. Rush:
Thank you for your response. Since at least 2010 Elisabeth H. Goodner communicated with me as "Lisa" Goodner. Please take notice that I do
not work in your office, or in the judicial branch.
Your response below to my request for assistance getting records is misplaced. The Thirteenth J udicial Circuit did not deny access to the records,
so your citation to "the exclusive remedy for a denial of access to administrative records of the judicial branch is stated in rule 2.420(l),"
Unfortunately it appears you, Ms. Goodner and Mr. Goodlett are misusing your public position to secure a special privilege, benefit, or
exemption for himself, herself, or others - the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, in violation of 112.313(6). Please stop this misconduct.
Ms. Rush, I believe the information you provided is not correct. Rule 2.420(l) is not the exclusive remedy according to Section 16.60 F.S., the
Public records mediation program within the Office of the Attorney General, although the Attorney General is not likely to assist me. So I am
asking you for the final time, as a disability accommodation request, for assistance getting public records from the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit.
I am also providing this email cc to the Hon. J ohn A. Tomasino, Clerk of the Florida Supreme Court.
While it does not apply here, the remedy under Rule 2.420(l), an action for mandamus, presumes a fair, honest and functioning judiciary. Florida
does not have a fair, honest and functioning judiciary. Instead, Florida courts operate as a system of favors. You may disagree, but it does not
matter, because Rule 2.420(l) does not apply.
I requested assistance with getting records because each attempt I make is met with harassment as defined by Florida Statutes, Chapter 784,
Assault; Battery; Culpable Negligence
Section 784.048 Stalking; definitions; penalties.
(1) As used in this section, the term:
(a) "Harass" means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person which causes substantial emotional distress to that person and
serves no legitimate purpose.
(2) A person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person commits the offense of stalking, a
misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(4) A person who, after an injunction for protection against repeat violence, sexual violence, or dating violence pursuant to s. 784.046, or an
injunction for protection against domestic violence pursuant to s. 741.30, or after any other court-imposed prohibition of conduct toward the
subject person or that persons property, knowingly, willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person
commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
As I stated earlier, you may consider my request made my request under disability law.
Failure to comply with statutes or regulatory provision that either are designed to protect a particular class of persons from their inability to
protect themselves or establish a duty to take precautions to guard a certain class of persons from a specific type of injury. Failure to do so
establishes negligence per se. Florida Freight Terminals, Inc. v. Cabanas, 354 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App., 3d Dist. 1978).
Under the Eggshell Skull Rule, defendant is liable for the plaintiff's unforeseeable and uncommon reactions to the defendant's negligent or
intentional tort. If the defendant commits a tort against the plaintiff without a complete defense, the defendant becomes liable for any injury that
is magnified by the plaintiff's peculiar characteristics. http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/eggshell_skull_rule
You may comply with the ADA through sections 282.601 through 282.606, Florida Statutes. I believe the records are stored electronically.
All electronic documents filed shall be accessible to persons with disabilities in the manner required by Section 508 of the Federal Rehabilitation
Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, sections 282.601 through 282.606, Florida Statutes
ACCESSIBILITY OF INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY
F.S. 282.601-282.606
282.602 Definitions.As used in this part, the term:
(1) "Accessible electronic information and information technology" means electronic information and information technology that conforms to
the standards for accessible electronic information and information technology as set forth by s. 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended, and 29 U.S.C. s. 794(d), including the regulations set forth under 36 C.F.R. part 1194.
282.606 Intent.It is the intent of the Legislature that, in construing this part, due consideration and great weight be given to the interpretations
of the federal courts relating to comparable provisions of s. 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, and 29 U.S.C. s. 794(d), including
the regulations set forth under 36 C.F.R. part 1194, as of J uly 1, 2006. History.s. 73, ch. 2006-227.
Ms. Rush, as a member of The Florida Bar, you have a duty to report misconduct of lawyers and judges as provided by Rule 4-8.3(a) and (b), that
Page 2of 5
12/10/2013
includes J udge Menendez and Mr. Rowland.
Rule 4-8.3 Reporting Professional Misconduct
(a) Reporting Misconduct of Other Lawyers. A lawyer who knows that another lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional
Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects shall inform the
appropriate professional authority.
(b) Reporting Misconduct of J udges. A lawyer who knows that a judge has committed a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct that
raises a substantial question as to the judge's fitness for office shall inform the appropriate authority.
It appears you, Ms. Rush, have knowledge of the fraud and impairment of Petition No. 12-7747 by J udge Menendez and Mr. Rowland, and thus a
duty pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4 - Misprision of felony.
Finally Ms. Rush, your continued obstruction, on behalf of Ms. Goodner, is an impairment of my current Petition No. 7280 to the US Supreme
Court, deprivation of rights under color of law, and a conspiracy against rights. See the links below.
Sincerely,
Neil J . Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala Florida 34481
Telephone: 352-854-7807
Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net

Fraud or Impairment of a legitimate government activity, 18 U.S.C. 371.
DOJ Criminal Resource Manual 923, paragraph 1
18 U.S.C. 371Conspiracy to Defraud the United States
The general conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. 371, creates an offense "[i]f two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the
United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose. (emphasis added). See Project, Tenth
Annual Survey of White Collar Crime, 32 Am. Crim. L. Rev. 137, 379-406 (1995)(generally discussing 371).
http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00923.htm
925 Obstructing or Impairing Legitimate Government Activity http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00925.htm
1739 Offenses Related to Obstruction of J ustice Offenses http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm01739.htm
Deprivation of rights under color of law, 18 U.S.C. 242. DOJ Summary. Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under
color of any
law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/242fin.php
Conspiracy against rights, 18 U.S.C. 241. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241
From: Laura Rush
To: 'Neil Gillespie'
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 2:04 PM
Subject: RE: Please see attached PDF, paper letter delivered by UPS today

Mr. Gillespie:

This e-mail responds to your October 10, 2013, and November 22, 2013, correspondence directed to State Courts
Administrator Lisa Goodner. I am General Counsel for the Office of the State Courts Administrator and authorized to respond to
your correspondence on behalf of Ms. Goodner.

You have asked that the Office of the State Courts Administrator assist you in obtaining records you requested, but
have not received, from the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit. Please be advised that the exclusive remedy for a denial of access to
administrative records of the judicial branch is stated in rule 2.420(l), Florida Rules of Judicial Administration. That provision
states:

(l) Denial of Access Request for Administrative Records. Expedited review of denials of access to administrative
records of the judicial branch shall be provided through an action for mandamus or other appropriate relief, in the
following manner:
(1) When a judge who has denied a request for access to records is the custodian, the action shall be filed in the
court having appellate jurisdiction to review the decisions of the judge denying access. Upon order issued by the
appellate court, the judge denying access to records shall file a sealed copy of the requested records with the
Page 3of 5
12/10/2013
appellate court.
(2) All other actions under this rule shall be filed in the circuit court of the circuit in which such denial of access
occurs.

The Office of the State Courts Administrator has no authority to administratively address or resolve a denial of access
to records within the custody of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit in lieu of the procedures stated in rule 2.420(l).

Your correspondence also contains allegations of misconduct by the court counsel and chief judge for the Thirteenth
Judicial Circuit. The Office of the State Courts Administrator has no authority to investigate or otherwise address these
allegations. Complaints of attorney misconduct should be directed to The Florida Bar. Information about how to file a complaint
is contained on The Florida Bars Internet site at:
http://www.floridabar.org/tfb/TFBConsum.nsf/0a92a6dc28e76ae58525700a005d0d53/dbac6623cf5c015f85257a3f0060b781!
OpenDocument. Complaints of judicial misconduct should be directed to the Judicial Qualifications Commission. Information
about how to file a complaint of judicial misconduct is contained on the Internet site for the Judicial Qualifications Commission
at: http://www.floridajqc.com/images/JQCComplaintForm.pdf.

Sincerely,
Laura Rush
General Counsel
(850) 488-1824

From: Neil Gillespie [mailto:neilgillespie@mfi.net]
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 2:53 AM
To: osca; Lisa Goodner; Laura Rush; Cal Goodlett; Eugene K. Pettis; Gregory W. Coleman; J ack Harkness; Paul Hill; J ohn Thomas Berry; Kenneth Lawrence
Marvin; Mary Ellen Bateman; Special Rapporteur Gabriela Knaul; Shuaib Chalklen Special Rapporteur Disability; InfoDesk UN Geneva; Hyacinthe Medenou;
Gianni Magazzeni UN Geneva; Eunice Ajambo; Revi Kumar; Css Intern1 Ohchr; William Abbuehl; USAFLM.State.Foreclosures@usdoj.gov; Tiffany Caparas2;
Tiffany Caparas1; McCalla Raymer E-service; Hon. Hale Ralph Stancil; Gregory J ones; AG Pamela J o Bondi; Bridget Kellogg Smitha; Renee Elise Thompson;
Patricia Moring; J ohnnye Ladine Friedrich; Barbara Burke; neilgillespie@mfi.net
Subject: Fw: Please see attached PDF, paper letter delivered by UPS today

Elisabeth H. Goodner, State Courts Adminstrator
The Office of the State Courts Administrator (OSCA)
500 S Duval St.
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-6556
Ms. Goodner:
When can I expect a response from you to my October 10, 2013 letter, and disability request for assistance getting records from the Thirteenth
J udicial Circuit of Florida, sent to you by email and in paper by United Parcel Service, No. 1Z64589FP296785173? The proof of delivery
shows J . Moon signed for the letter October 11, 2013 at 10.02 AM. Therefore I conclude that you received the letter.
Other than a limited response October 11, 2013 by General Counsel Laura Rush about the Second District Court of Appeal, I do not show a
response from you, Elizabeth H. Goodner, State Courts Adminstrator.
Kindly provide your response to my October 10, 2013 letter, and disability request for assistance getting records from the Thirteenth J udicial
Circuit of Florida, so that I many inform the U.S. Supreme Court, and International Human Rights Organizations, and others about your
position.
Sincerely,
Neil J . Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Telephone: 352-854-7807
From: Neil Gillespie
To: Lisa Goodner
Cc: Laura Rush ; Cal Goodlett
Page 4of 5
12/10/2013
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 10:38 AM
Subject: Please see attached PDF, paper letter delivered by UPS today

Page 5of 5
12/10/2013
Gillespie p1 of 2
1
DR. KARIN HUFFER
Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist #NV0082
ADAAA Titles II and III Specialist
Counseling and Forensic Psychology
3236 Mountain Spring Rd. Las Vegas, NV 89146
702-528-9588 www.lvaallc.com
October 28, 2010
To Whom It May Concern:
I created the first request for reasonable ADA Accommodations for Neil Gillespie. The
document was properly and timely filed. As his ADA advocate, it appeared that his right
to accommodations offsetting his functional impairments were in tact and he was being
afforded full and equal access to the Court. Ever since this time, Mr. Gillespie has been
subjected to ongoing denial of his accommodations and exploitation of his disabilities
As the litigation has proceeded, Mr. Gillespie is routinely denied participatory and
testimonial access to the court. He is discriminated against in the most brutal ways
possible. He is ridiculed by the opposition, accused of malingering by the J udge and
now, with no accommodations approved or in place, Mr. Gillespie is threatened with
arrest if he does not succumb to a deposition. This is like threatening to arrest a
paraplegic if he does not show up at a deposition leaving his wheelchair behind. This is
precedent setting in my experience. I intend to ask for DOJ guidance on this matter.
While my work is as a disinterested third party in terms of the legal particulars of a case,
I am charged with assuring that the client has equal access to the court physically,
psychologically, and emotionally. Critical to each case is that the disabled litigant is able
to communicate and concentrate on equal footing to present and participate in their cases
and protect themselves.
Unfortunately, there are cases that, due to the newness of the ADAAA, lack of training of
judicial personnel, and entrenched patterns of litigating without being mandated to
accommodate the disabled, that persons with disabilities become underserved and are too
often ignored or summarily dismissed. Power differential becomes an abusive and
oppressive issue between a person with disabilities and the opposition and/or court
personnel. The litigant with disabilities progressively cannot overcome the stigma and
bureaucratic barriers. Decisions are made by medically unqualified personnel causing
them to be reckless in the endangering of the health and well being of the client. This
creates a severe justice gap that prevents the ADAAA from being effectively applied. In
our adversarial system, the situation can devolve into a war of attrition. For an
unrepresented litigant with a disability to have a team of lawyers as adversaries, the
demand of litigation exceeds the unrepresented, disabled litigants ability to maintain
health while pursuing justice in our courts. Neil Gillespies case is one of those. At this
juncture the harm to Neil Gillespies health, economic situation, and general
diminishment of him in terms of his legal case cannot be overestimated and this bell
Gillespie p2 of 2
2
cannot be unrung. He is left with permanent secondary wounds.

Additionally, Neil Gillespie faces risk to his life and health and exhaustion of the ability
to continue to pursue justice with the failure of the ADA Administrative Offices to
respond effectively to the request for accommodations per Federal and Florida mandates.
It seems that the ADA Administrative offices that I have appealed to ignore his requests
for reasonable accommodations, including a response in writing. It is against my
medical advice for Neil Gillespie to continue the traditional legal path without properly
being accommodated. It would be like sending a vulnerable human being into a field of
bullies to sort out a legal problem.
I am accustomed to working nationally with courts of law as a public service. I agree
that our courts must adhere to strict rules. However, they must be flexible when it comes
to ADAAA Accommodations preserving the mandates of this federal law Under Title II
of the ADA. While public entities are not required to create new programs that provide
heretofore unprovided services to assist disabled persons. (Townsend v. Quasim (9th Cir.
2003) 328 F.3d 511, 518) they are bound under ADAAA as a ministerial/administrative
duty to approve any reasonable accommodation even in cases merely regarded as
having a disability with no formal diagnosis.
The United States Department of J ustice Technical Assistance Manual adopted by
Florida also provides instructive guidance: "The ADA provides for equality of
opportunity, but does not guarantee equality of results. The foundation of many of the
specific requirements in the Department's regulations is the principle that individuals
with disabilities must be provided an equally effective opportunity to participate in or
benefit from a public entity's aids, benefits, and services. (U.S. Dept. of J ustice, Title II,
Technical Assistance Manual (1993) II-3.3000.) A successful ADA claim does not
require excruciating details as to how the plaintiff's capabilities have been affected by
the impairment, even at the summary judgment stage. Gillen v. Fallon Ambulance Serv.,
Inc., 283 F.3d. My organization follows these guidelines maintaining a firm, focused and
limited stance for equality of participatory and testimonial access. That is what has been
denied Neil Gillespie.
The record of his ADAAA accommodations requests clearly shows that his well-
documented disabilities are now becoming more stress-related and marked by depression
and other serious symptoms that affect what he can do and how he can do it particularly
under stress. Purposeful exacerbation of his symptoms and the resulting harm is, without
a doubt, a strategy of attrition mixed with incompetence at the ADA Administrative level
of these courts. I am prepared to stand by that statement as an observer for more than
two years.
Document Number
FEI/EIN Number
Date Fi l ed
State
Status
Last Event
Event Date Fi l ed
Event Effecti ve Date
Forei gn Li mi ted Li abi l i ty Company
MCCALLA RAYMER, LLC
Fi l i ng Informati on
M11000002235
582145201
05/04/2011
GA
INACTIVE
ADMIN DISSOLUTION FOR ANNUAL REPORT
09/27/2013
NONE
Pri nci pal Address
6 CONCOURSE PARKWAY, SUITE 3200
ATLANTA, GA 30328
Mai l i ng Address
ATLANTA, GA 30328
Regi stered Agent Name & Address
C T CORPORATION SYSTEM
1200 SOUTH PINE ISLAND ROAD
PLANTATION, FL 33324
Manager/Member Detai l
Name & Address
Title MGR
STONE, MARTY
ATLANTA, GA 30328
Title MGR
SILVER, ADAM
Copyright and Privacy Policies
State of Florida, Department of State
Home Contact Us E-Filing Services Document Searches Forms Help
http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail/EntityName/forl-m11000002235-5db53846-7a33-40b4-911b-ccf54c883a96/M...
Title MGR
MCGHEE, CARL
ATLANTA, GA 30328
Title MGR
REISS, WENDY R
ATLANTA, GA 30328
Title MGR
ALTOM, KENT
ATLANTA, GA 30328
Title MGR
BOND, J ANE
ATLANTA, GA 30328
Annual Reports
Report Year Fi l ed Date
2012 01/24/2012
Document Images
01/24/2012 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
05/04/2011 -- Foreign Limited View image in PDF format
http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail/EntityName/forl-m11000002235-5db53846-7a33-40b4-911b-ccf54c883a96/M...
VIA UPS No. 1Z64589FNY93689732 December 9, 2013
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 seven (7) sworn complaints for Misuse of Public Position, 112.313(6) F.S.
in the fraud or impairment of my Petition No. 12-7747 to the U.S. Supreme Court, a legitimate
government activity, 18 U.S.C. 371, by Attorney General Pam Bondi and others in her employ,
who conspired with Respondent David A. Rowland, General Counsel for Respondent Thirteenth
J udicial Circuit Florida, and other Respondents and non-respondents, in a conspiracy against my
rights, 18 U.S.C. 241, to deprive me of rights under color of law, 18 U.S.C. 242.
Attorney General Bondi et al are currently engaged in ongoing Misuse of Public Position in
Petition No. 13-7280 to the U.S. Supreme Court, where The Florida Bar is a cross-party for
political persecution of me in retaliation for my Petition No. 12-7747 to the Government for a
redress of grievances protected by the First Amendment. Petition No. 13-7280 calls into question
the constitutionality of the federal HECM reverse mortgage statute, and eight Florida statutes.
Please find enclosed sworn complaints for Misuse of Public Position for the following:
1. Pamela J o Bondi, Attorney General of Florida
2. Diana R. Esposito, the Chief-Assistant Attorney General, Tampa
3. Kenneth V. Wilson, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa
4. Valerie Williford, employee of the Office of Attorney General, Tampa
5. Laura Martin, employee of the Office of Attorney General, Tampa
6. David A. Rowland, General Counsel, Thirteenth J udicial Circuit Florida
7. Sandra Burge, employee of the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit Florida
Petition No. 12-7747 was denied February 19, 2013. Rehearing was denied April 15, 2013.
In May 2013 I obtained 323 pages of public records from the Attorney General showing
Respondent David Rowland concocted with others a fraud to falsely portray to Asst. AG
Kenneth Wilson that I did not serve Rowland my petition as I certified under S.Ct. Rule 29.
Wilson claims he relied on Rowlands fraud, and did not submit a brief in opposition due the
Supreme Court J anuary 14, 2013. Without the Attorney Generals response, I was denied due
process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The Supreme Court relies on opposition
briefs as part of its adversarial process to litigate and decide a petition. Floridas opposition brief
was due J anuary 14, 2013 but was impaired by fraud. AG Bondi did not respond for Florida, thus
no opposition brief was distributed for the Supreme Courts Conference February 15, 2013.
Virlindia A. Doss, Executive Director December 9, 2013
Florida Commission on Ethics Page - 2
It now appears certain that Attorney General Bondi, AAG Esposito, AAG Wilson, Ms. Williford
and Ms. Martin were co-conspirators with Mr. Rowland all along. Attorney General Bondi,
AAG Esposito, AAG Wilson, Ms. Williford and Ms. Martin created with a corrupt intent the
following false public documents in furtherance of the fraud or impairment of Petition 12-7747:
Letter dated May 18, 2012 of Asst. Attorney General Diana Esposito sent through the U.S.
mail to me about Eleventh Circuit docket number 12-11028-B, an appeal of District Court
case 5:11-cv-00539, that stated a material falsehood, ...your initial complaint was dismissed
for, among other reasons, failure to make service of process on any of the defendants. Since
that is the Order of the Court.... Tellingly no such order exists in case 5:11-cv-00539.

Synopsis of Major Issues, AG Case #Tampa Monitor, a false public record corruptly created
by AAG Esposito, AAG Wilson, Ms. Williford and Ms. Martin to impair Petition 12-7747.

The Office of Attorney General is very familiar with this matter since at least 2007.

Attorney General Bill McCollum responded in December 2007 The Attorney General's
Office does not have jurisdiction in this matter with Ryan Christopher Rodems and Barker,
Rodems & Cook, P.A. who stole $7,143 from my contingency fee case.

In 2010 I made a complaint to McCollum under the 19th Statewide Prosecution Office
because this matter involves racketeering in several different circuits: Hillsborough (13),
Marion (5th), Alachua (8th), Leon (2nd) and now Pinellas (6th) with Eugene Castagliuolo.
The Attorney General has my federal complaint in its files since 2010 which I forgot about
until Pam Bondis Office provided me hundreds of pages of my filings with the AG.

Pam Bondi is well aware of this case too and J udge Martha Cook, and Floridas first
Husband and Husband vested mortgage to benefit a wealthy banker who bailed-out Cooks
community bank that was about to fail in 2009 under FDIC order. Unfortunately J udge Cook
is for sale. Petition 13-7280 shows honest services fraud with J udge Cook and Mr. Rodems,
as recently held in U.S. v Terry, pages 35-37 in my petition, and accompany this complaint.

Letter dated J anuary 8, 2013 of Asst. Attorney General Wilson to Mr. Rowland, a false
public record corruptly created as part of a conspiracy to impair Petition 12-7747, and sent
by email J anuary 8, 2013 at 12.52 PM to Mr. Rowland and Ms. Burge.
Sandra Burge, a paralegal assistant to David Rowland of the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit,
corruptly created and sent false public email December 20, 2012 at 12.51 PM to AAG Esposito,
Cc to Mr. Rowland and Chris Nauman (Asst. General Counsel, Thirteenth J udicial Circuit), a
falsehood representing that I did not serve my petition or appendices as claimed, and in
furtherance of the fraud or impairment of Petition 12-7747.
My enclosed affidavit to the United Nations, filed in the U.S. Supreme Court in 13, 7280 shows
how the conspiracy worked between the Attorney General and the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit.
Public records show that between September 27, 2012 and December 28, 2012, the persons
shown below knowingly and corruptly created a false official record for the state of Florida, the
Synopsis of Major Issues, AG Case #Tampa Monitor.
Diana R. Esposito, Chief-Assistant Attorney General of Florida, Tampa, Bar ID 16523
Author, Synopsis of Major Issues, AG Case #Tampa Monitor 12/20/2012 01:53:45 PM
Kenneth V. Wilson, Assistant Attorney General of Florida, Tampa, Bar ID 45212
Author, Synopsis of Major Issues, AG Case #Tampa Monitor 12/20/2012 02:42:13 PM
Laura Martin, author, Synopsis of Major Issues. May be employee of Thirteenth Circuit
Synopsis of Major Issues, AG Case #Tampa Monitor 09/27/2012 03:16:26 PM
Valerie Williford, author, Synopsis of Major Issues, AG Case #Tampa Monitor 12/28/2012
Synopsis of Major Issues, AG Case #Tampa Monitor 12/28/2012 10:48:19 AM
The Attorney Generals Synopsis of Major Issues states the following in general
1
.
Plaintiff sued his former attorney and law firm in the 13th judicial Circuit Court. He lost
by summary judgment. He now brings this claim against his former attorney and law firm
and all the judges who had any involvement in his 13th J udicial Circuit Case. Notably, he
had until October 29, 2010 to file an amended complaint and has not done so. He filed a
voluntary dismissal as to his former attorney and law firm. The J udges and the 13th
J udicial Circuit have not been served.
The Attorney Generals Synopsis of Major Issues makes false statements:
He lost by summary judgment. He now brings this claim against his former attorney and
law firm and all the judges who had any involvement in his 13th J udicial Circuit Case.
Case No. 5:10-cv-503 was filed before He lost by summary judgment, and before J udge
Cook and Mr. Rodems engaged in honest services fraud, and used the mail to carry out a
scheme or artifice to defraud another, 18 U.S.C. 1341, of the intangible right of honest
services. 18 U.S.C. 1346.
Case No. 5:10-cv-503 brings claims against one former attorney, Robert W. Bauer, one
opposing counsel, Ryan Christopher Rodems, and two former law firms, Barker, Rodems &
Cook, P.A., and the Law Office of Robert W. Bauer, P.A.

1
There is no mention of my second case which shows racketeering, and failure of The Florida
Bar to discipline Robert W. Bauer, a Bar LRS referral, who charged me $31,863 in fees that only
benefited him, then he switched sides and joined Mr. Rodems to undermine my Bar complaints,
and Petition 12-7747.
Case No. 5:10-cv-503 does not make claims against all the judges who had any involvement
in his 13th J udicial Circuit Case. No claim was made against Hillsborough J udge Richard
Nielsen, the first trial judge. No claim was made against J udge J ames Arnold, the last judge.
The Attorney Generals Synopsis of Major Issues makes a false or misleading statement:
Notably, he had until October 29, 2010 to file an amended complaint and has not done so.
He filed a voluntary dismissal as to his former attorney and law firm.
In Case No. 5:10-cv-503, voluntary dismissal was made in lieu of an amended Complaint,
and accepted by the Court, See PLAINTIFFS NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL AS
TO DEFENDANTS RODEMS & BRC IN LIEU OF AMENDED COMPLAINT (Doc. 22)
The Attorney Generals Synopsis of Major Issues makes a false or misleading statement:
The J udges and the 13th J udicial Circuit have not been served.
In Case No. 5:10-cv-503, The J udges and the 13th J udicial Circuit were served under Rule
4(d) waving service, a last ditch effort when clerks will not issue summons for judges. This is a
detailed matter, Deputy U.S. Marshall Devall admitted this is an issue. In Alachua County, Sonja
Mullerin, a former lawyer, filed a civil RICO lawsuit in Gainesville but the District Clerk would
not issue summons for judges. See Consolidated Notice of Filing Service of Process (Proposed)
page 1, 155 pages online http://www.scribd.com/doc/172064977/
Currently the Attorney General will not provide public records for Eugene Castagliuolo, a
former AAG who went into private practice many years ago who represented me in 2011 and
should not be practicing due to mental health issues, in my opinion. In 2012 Castagliuolo
wrongly sued Florida attorney J ackson K. Hilliard in Pinellas County, initially in small claims
court. The case was later transferred to county court. Mr. Castagliulo was unable to state a cause
of action for himself, and the matter and others warranted a Rule 3-5.2(a) Emergency Suspension
in my view.
Political Persecution by The Florida Bar
I am being persecuted by The Florida Bar, U.S. J udge William Terrell Hodges, and Florida
attorneys Ryan Christopher Rodems and Eugene P. Castagliuolo, in retaliation for petitioning for
a redress of grievances in Petition No. 12-7747 to the U.S. Supreme Court. Also see Petition No.
SC11-1622 for writ of mandamus, Florida Supreme Court, J anuary 9, 2012.
Specific examples of current and ongoing political persecution of me include:
1. The Florida Bar for an open investigation of me for Unlicensed Practice of Law (UPL).
2. Mr. Rodems made the UPL complaint against me for representing myself and my interests.
3. J udge Hodges corruptly assisted McCalla Raymer in a wrongfully foreclosure of my home.
4. Mr. Castagliuolo ongoing threats to interfere with my Social Security disability income.
In a few days I plan to submit a Supplemental Brief on Misuse of Public Position and will
provide a copy on request, along with whatever else you require. Please find enclosed:
1. The docket in Petition 12-7747, and first page of Statement of the Case, appears at Exhibit 1.
2. The docket in Petition 13-7280, and first page of Statement of the Case, appears at Exhibit 2.
3. The cover page for the current Constitutional Challenge appendix appears at Exhibit 3.
4. Affidavit of Neil J . Gillespie, Non-Cooperation of the Florida Attorney General, Exhibit 4.
5. Urgent Appeal to the United Nations for protection from political persecution. Exhibit 5.
6. My Affidavit to the UN, Fraud or Impairment of Petition No. 12-7747. Exhibit 6.
7. Synopsis of Major Issues, AG Case #Tampa Monitor. Exhibit 7.
8. Consolidated Notice of Filing Service of Process (Proposed). Exhibit 8.
9. Honest Services Fraud, J udge Cook and Mr. Rodems. Exhibit 9.
10. Letter of Bill McCollum November 7, 2007. Exhibit 10.
11. Letter of Bill McCollum November 5, 2010, re Statewide Grand J ury. Exhibit 11.
12. Letter of Diana Esposito May 18, 2012 to Neil Gillespie. Exhibit 12.
13. Letter of Kenneth Wilson J anuary 8, 2013 to David Rowland. Exhibit 13.
14. Affidavit of Neil J . Gillespie to the U.N., I have a well-founded fear of political persecution.
Department of Legal Affairs, Office of Civil Rights
Fla. Stat. 16.57, as amended in 2003, authorizes the Attorney General to investigate alleged
civil rights violations under chapter 760. Fla. Stat. 760.021, as added in 2003, provides that the
Attorney General may commence a civil action for damages, injunctive relief, civil penalties,
and other relief against any person or group perpetuating discriminatory practices. Any damages
recovered shall accrue to the injured party.
Neil J . Gillespie v. Thirteenth J udicial Circuit Florida et al, case no. 5:10-cv-503-WTH-(DAB)-
TBS, U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, Ocala Division, is a civil rights lawsuit:
1. This lawsuit arises under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), 42
U.S.C., Chapter 126, Equal Opportunities for Individuals with Disabilities,...
Plaintiff also makes claims under 42 U.S.C. 1983 Civil action for deprivation of rights,
and the following amendments to the Constitution of the United States: The Fifth and
VirlindiaA. Doss,ExecutiveDirector December9,2013
FloridaCommissiononEthics
Page- 6
FourteenthAmendmentsas toDueProcess;TheEightAmendmentasto Cruel&
UnusualPunishment;andtheFourteenthAmendmentasto EqualProtection. This
lawsuitalsobringsclaimsunderArticle 1, Section21 of theConstitutionoftheStateof
Florida,Accessto Courts; Article 1, Section 17of theConstitutionoftheStateof
Florida,ExcessivePunishments.ThisCourtis vestedwithoriginaljurisdictionunder28
U.S.C. 1331, 1343,andsupplementaljurisdictionoverthestatelawclaimspursuantto
28 U.S.C. 1367.NOTE: TheComplaintwasservedunderRule4(d)waiver. See
http://www.scribd.com!doc/172064977/Thirteenth-Judicial-Circuit-Service-of-Process-Appendix
TheAttorneyGeneralofFloridashouldhaveappearedinthismatter,andrepresentedme, not
triedto cover-upwrongdoing. Thiscasehasanumberofdisabilityissues. Iwillprovidemore
informationassoonaspossible.Thankyou.
N 11 J. Gilles 'e
8 92 SW 15thLoop
Ocala,Florida34481
Telephone: 352-854-7807
Enclosures
-------------------------------------
STATEOFFLORIDA
COMMISSIONONETHICS
P.O.DRAWER15709,TALLAHASSEE,FLORIDA 32317-5709
COMPLAINT
I. PERSON BRINGING COMPLAINT:
Neil J. Gillespie T I h
one
N b
er:
352-854-7807
N
arne: e ep urn _
Address:8092SW 115th Loop
C
t Ocala C
oun
t
y:
Marion Z C d
e:
34481
1 y: lp 0 _
2. PERSON AGAINST WHOM COMPLAINT IS BROUGHT:
Currentorformerpublicofficer,publicemployee,candidate,orlobbyist- pleaseuseonecomplaintform
foreachpersonyou wish tocomplainagainst:
Telephone 850-414-3300
TheCapitol PL-01, Office oftheAttorneyGeneral
ress:__-_- _
Add
C
t Tallahassee C Leon Z C d 32399-1050
1 y: ounty: lp 0 e: _
T
"tl f ill "t" h ld ht AttorneyGeneralofFlorida
1 eo 0 lceorposllon e orsoug : _
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 whomyou believe may be witnesses. Ifyou believe that a
particular provision ofArticle II, Section 8, Florida Constitution (the Sunshine Amendment) orofPart
III, Chapter 112, Florida Statutes (the Code ofEthics for Public Officers and Employees) has been
violated, please statethe specific section(s). Pleasedo notattach copies oflengthydocuments; iftheyare
relevant,yourdescriptionofthemwillsuffice" Also,pleasedonotsubmitvideotapesoraudiotapes"
4. OATH STATEOFFLORIDA "
COUNTYOF _
this _
I, the person bringing this complaint, do
depose on oath or affirmation and say that
thefacts setforth in theforegoingcomplaint
and attachmentstheretoaretrueandcorrect
tothebestof myknowledgeand belief
S
CEFORM 50-EFF.4/2008
------------------------------------
STATEOFFLORIDA
COMMISSIONONETHICS
P.O. DRAWER15709,TALLAHASSEE,FLORIDA 82817-5709
COMPLAINT
1. PERSON BRINGING COMPLAINT:
NeilJ. Gillespie T I h N b 352-854-7807
N
arne: e ep one urn er: _
Address:8092SW115thLoop
C
at Ocala C t Marion
Z
" C d
0
34481
_
1 y: _-----_-----_-_ oun y: _
Ip e:
Currentorformerpublicofficer,publicemployee,candidate,orlobbyist- please useonecomplaintform
foreachpersonyouwishtocomplainagainst:
Diana R. Esposito, Chief-AssistantAttorneyGeneral T I h N b 813-233-2600,x110
Narne: ----_---_------ e ep one urn er: _
501 EastKennedyBlvd., Suite 1100,OfficeoftheAttorneyGeneral
ress: ---- _
Add
C
at Tampa C t Hillsborough C d 33602
1 y: oun y: ---
Z
"
0 - lp e:
T
"tl f ffi "t" h ld ht Chief-AssistantAttorneyGeneralTampa
1 eo 0 lceorposllon e orsoug : -
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 ofthe person 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, pleasestatethe specific section(s). Pleasedo notattachcopies oflengthydocuments; iftheyare
relevant,yourdescriptionofthemwill suffice. Also,pleasedonotsubmitvideotapesoraudiotapes.
4. OATH
STATEOFFLORIDA
COUNTYOF
-------...;;------------
andattachmentstheretoaretrueandcorrect
tothebestofmyknowledgeandbelief
_
CE FORM 50-EFF.4/2008
------------------------------------
STATEOFFLORIDA
COMMISSIONONETHICS
P. o.DRAWER15709,TALLAHASSEE,FLORIDA 82817-5709
COMPLAINT
I. PERSON BRINGING COMPLAINT:
N
arne:
NeilJ. Gillespie
-_____________
Teleph
one
N
urn
b
er:
352-854-7807
_
Address:8092SW 115thLoop
C
t Ocala
-________
C t Marion Z
Ip
C d
e:
34481
1 y: oun y: 0 _
foreachpersonyouwish tocomplainagainst:
Kenneth V. Wilson, AssistantAttorneyGeneralTampa 813-233-2600
N
arne: TelephoneNumber: -_
501 EastKennedyBlvd., Civil Litigation Bureau, OfficeoftheAttorneyGeneral
ress: - _
Add
Hillsborough Z C d 33602
City:Tampa
C
oun
t
y: Ip 0 e: _
T
"tl f ill "t" h ld ht AssistantAttorneyGeneralTampa
1 eo 0 lceorposllon e orsoug : -
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
violated, pleasestate thespecific section(s). Pleasedo notattach copies oflengthydocuments; iftheyare
relevant,yourdescriptionofthemwill suffice. Also,pleasedonotsubmitvideotapesoraudiotapes.
4. OATH
STATEOFFLORIDA ""\
COUNTYOF ~ . . . . . = . . ~ ~ ~ _
tothebestof myknowledgeandbelief
this-------..,e;-----
CEFORM50-EFF.4/2008
------------------------------------
STATEOFFLORIDA
COMMISSIONONETHICS
COMPLAINT
Neil J. Gillespie T I h N b 352-854-7807
Narne: ------------ e ep one urn er: _
C
t Ocala C t Marion Z C d 34481
I y: oun y: lp 0 e: _
ValerieWilliford 813-233-2600
N
arne: TelephoneNumber: - _
501 EastKennedyBlvd., Suite 1100,OfficeoftheAttorneyGeneral
Add
ress: --------- _
Hillsborough
C d City: Tampa 33602
C
oun
t
y: _
Z
lp 0 e: _
Titleof officeorpositionheldorsought: EmployeeoftheOfficeofAttorneyGeneral
providinga detailed description ofthe facts and the actions ofthe person named above. Include relevant
violated, pleasestatethespecific section(s). Pleasedo notattach copies oflengthydocuments; iftheyare
relevant,yourdescriptionofthemwillsuffice. Also,pleasedonotsubmitvideotapesoraudiotapes.
4. OATH
STATEOFFLORIDA \
COUNTYOF _
Sworpto(oraffirmeqJandsubscribedbeforeme
I, the person bringing this complaint, do this 'LQ dayof USh!..gtk.Qs:z-..-..:. ,
20 l3 liiit.le:r: L ,I!:'
thefacts setforth in theforegoingcomplaint (nameof personmlaJiiJ"11I!J.s!at.el;J;.en1:j
andattachmentstheretoare trueandcorrect
tothebestofmyknowledgeandbelief.
CE FORM50-EFF.4/2008
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
STATEOFFLORIDA
COMMISSIONONETHICS
P. O. DRAWER15709,TALLAHASSEE,FLORIDA 82817-5709
COMPLAINT
NeilJ. Gillespie T I h N b 352-854-7807
Narne: ---------------- e ep one urn er: _
C
t Ocala Marion Z C d 34481
I y: ---
C
oun
t
y: lp 0 e: _
Laura Martin 813 233 2600
N
ame:__- TelephoneNumber: - -
Address: 501 EastKennedyBlvd., Suite 1100,OfficeoftheAttorneyGeneral
City: Tampa
C
oun
t
y: lp 0 e: _
Titleof officeorpositionheldorsought: EmployeeoftheOfficeofAttorneyGeneral
providinga detailed description ofthefacts and the actions ofthe person named above. Include relevant
violated, please statethespecific section(s). Pleasedo not attach copies oflengthydocuments; iftheyare
4. OATH
STATEOFFLORIDA
COUNTYOF
to(oraffirmed) andsubscribedbeforeme
I, the person bringing this complaint, do this dayof ,
20 \3 ,by ;j. .
(name fperson
------------------------------------
this
20 ?2
(,--tk
,by
dayof
l0iA-k
(name

:r. ,u...@'?PC.-e
ofRe
,
STATEOFFLORIDA
COMMISSIONONETHICS
P.O.DRAWER 15709,TALLAHASSEE,FLORIDA 82817-5709
COMPLAINT
Narne: e ep one urn er: _
C
t Ocala C t Marion
Z
C d 34481
1 y: ----___ oun y: _ Ip 0 e: _
DavidA. Rowland, GeneralCounsel T I h N b (813)272-6843
N
arne: e ep one urn er: _
800 E. TwiggsStreet, Suite603, Legal Department,ThirteenthJudicialCircuitOfFlorida
ress: _
Add
City:Tampa
C
oun
t
y: Ip 0 e: _
T
tl f ill t h ld ht GeneralCounsel,ThirteenthJudicialCircuitOfFlorida
1 eo 0 lceorposllon e orsoug : -_
providinga detailed description ofthefacts 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
violated,pleasestatethespecific section(s). Pleasedo notattach copies oflengthydocuments; iftheyare
4. OATH
STATEOFFLORIDA
COUNTYOF
Swornto(oraffirmed) andsubscribedbeforeme

OFCOMPLAINANT
CEFORM50-EFF.4/2008
------------------------------------
STATEOFFLORIDA
COMMISSIONONETHICS
COMPLAINT
Narne: -------_______ e ep one urn er: _
C
t Ocala
--___________
C t Marion Z
Ip
C d 34481
1 y: __ oun y: 0 e: _
TelephoneNumber: (813)272-6843
800 E. Twiggs Street, Suite603, Legal Department,ThirteenthJudicial CircuitOfFlorida
Add
ress: ---------- _
City:Tampa
Hillsborough
C d 33602
C
oun
t
y:
Ip 0 e: -
_
Z
__ __
T
tl f ffi t h ld ht ParalegalAssistant,ThirteenthJudicial CircuitOfFlorida
1 eo 0 lceorposllon e orsoug : --- _
providinga detailed description ofthe facts and the actions ofthe person named above. Include relevant
violated, please statethe specific section(s). Pleasedo notattachcopies oflengthydocuments; iftheyare
4. OATH
STATEOFFLORIDA
COUNTYOF_...-.._A_tlL_"""_o _
Swornto(oraffirmed)andsubscribedbeforeme
I, the person bringing this complaint, do this tD.... dayof L- ,
20 ,by f..) eu- :r: LL$ t? l6
thefacts setforth in theforegoingconlplaint (nameof personmakin statement)
andattachmentstheretoaretrueandcorrect
ignatureof NotaryP c- StateofFlorida)
tothebestofmyknowledgeandbelief.
III

VIAUPSNo. lZ64589FNY95401485 December11, 2013
VirlindiaA. Doss,ExecutiveDirector
FloridaCommissiononEthics
325 JohnKnoxRoad
BuildingE, Suite200
Tallahassee,FL32303
DearMs. Doss:
Thisletterandenclosuresareto supplementtheethicscomplaintsIfiledMonday. Pleasefind
enclosedthefollowing:
PetitionNo. 12-7747,writofcertiorari,U.S. SupremeCourt
NeilJ. Gillespiev. ThirteenthJudicialCircuitFloridaetal
DeniedFebruary19,2013;rehearingdeniedApril 15,2013
Guideto PetitionNo. 12-7747,withCD-ROMofalldocuments
PetitionNo. 13-7280,writofcertiorari,U.S. SupremeCourt
NeilJ. Gillespiev. ReverseMortgageServices,Inc. etal
FiledOctober23,2013;docketedNovember8, 2013;responsesdueDecember9,2013
Con1plaint,FloridaCommissiononHumanRelations, December10, 2013
UPLInvestigation,YolandaMartinez,No. 20143031 (9A),December5,2013
FloridaBarinvestigation,DanielleParsons,No. 2014-30,535 (9A), December6,2013
ConsolidatedAmendedMotionforDisabilityAccommodation,Waiverof
Confidentiality,MotionforDeclaratoryJudgment,AppointGuardianAdLitem;Notice,
Pro SeE-filingProhibitionbyDistrictCourt;AffidavitofConflict,Denialof ADA
Accommodation,byHillsboroughJudgeClaudiaR. Isom. (C.A.ll 12-11213, 12-11028)
Note: ExhibitsfortheDisabilitydocumentsareintheCD-ROM,PetitionNo. 12-7747.
Telephone: 352-854-7807
Enclosures
THEFLORIDABAR
651 EASTJEFFERSONSTREET
JOHNF.HARKNESS,JR. TALLAHASSEE,FL 32399-2300 850/561-5600
EXECUTIVEDIRECTOR WWW.FLORIDABAR.ORG
December6, 2013
Ms. DanielleNicoleParsons
225 ERobinsonStSte660
Orlando,FL32801-4321
Re: ComplaintbyNeilJ. GillespieagainstDanielleNicoleParsons
TheFloridaBarFileNo. 2014-30,525 (9A)
DearMs. Parsons:
Enclosed is a copy ofan inquiry/complaint and any supporting documents submitted by the
above referenced complainant(s). Your response to this complaint is required under the
provisionsofRule 4-8.4(g), Rules ofProfessional Conductofthe Rules Regulating The Florida
Bar, andis dueinourofficebyDecember20,2013. Responsesshouldnotexceed25 pagesand
may refer to any additional documents or exhibits that are available on request. Faillire to
provideawrittenresponseto thiscomplaintis initselfaviolationofRule 4-8.4(g). Pleasenote
that any correspondence must be sent through the u.s. mail; we cannot accept faxed material.
You arefurtherrequiredto furnish thecomplainantwitha completecopyofyourwritten
response,includinganydocumentssubmittedtherewith.
Please note that pursuant to Rule 3-7.1(b), Rules ofDiscipline, any reports, correspondence,
papers, recordings and/ortranscripts ofhearings received from eitheryou orthe complainant(s)
shall become a part ofthe public record inthis matterand thus accessible to the public upon a
disposition ofthis file. It should be noted that The Florida Bar is required to acknowledge the
status ofproceedings during the pendency ofan investigation, ifa specific inquiry is made and
the matteris deemedto be inthe publicdomain. Pursuantto Rule 3-7.1(t), RulesofDiscipline,
you are further required to complete and return the enclosed Certificate ofDisclosure form.
Further, please notify this office, in writing, ofany pending civil, criminal, or administrative
litigationwhichpertainstothisgrievance. Pleasenotethatthis is acontinuingobligationshould
newlitigationdevelopduringthependencyof thismatter.
Ms. Danielle Nicole Parsons
December 6, 2013
Page Two
Finally, the filing of this complaint does not preclude conlmunication between the attorney and
the complainant(s). Please review the enclosed Notice for information on submitting your
response.
Sincerely,
.
.
. .............. Q,1I.

Theodore P. Littlewood Jr., Bar Counsel
Attorney Consumer Assistance Program
ACAP Hotline 866-352-0707
Enclosures (Certificate of Disclosure, Notice of Grievance Procedures, Copy of Complaint,
Notice - Mailing Instructions)
cc: Mr. Neil J. Gillespie
NOTICEOFGRIEVANCEPROCEDURES
1. The enclosed letter is an informal inquiry. Your response is required under the
provisions ofThe Rules Regulating The Florida Bar 4 8.4(g), Rules ofProfessional Conduct.
FailuretoprovideawrittenresponsetothiscomplaintisinitselfaviolationofRule4 8.4(g). If
you do not respond, the matter will be forwarded to the grievance committee for disposition in
accordancewithRule3-7.3 of theRulesofDiscipline.
2. Many complaints considered first by staff counsel are not forwarded to a grievance
committee, as they do not involve violations ofthe Rules ofProfessional Conduct justifying
disciplinaryaction.
3. "PursuanttoRule3-7.I(a),RulesofDiscipline,anyresponsebyyouintheseproceedings
shall becomepartofthepublicrecordofthismatterandtherebybecomeaccessibletothepublic
upon the closllre ofthe case by Barcounselorupon a finding ofno probable cause, probable
cause, minor misconduct, or recommendation ofdiversion. Disclosure during the pendency of
aninvestigationmaybe made onlyas to statusifaspecific inquiryconcerningthis caseis made
andifthismatterisgenerallyknowntobeinthepublicdomain."
4. The grievance committee is the Bar's "grandjury." Its function and procedure are set
forth in Rule 3-7.4. Proceedings before the grievance committee, for the most part, are non-
adversarial in nature. However, you should carefullyreview Chapter3ofthe Rules Regulating
TheFloridaBar.
5. Ifthe grievance committee finds probable cause, formal adversarial proceedings, which
ordinarilyleadtodispositionbytheSupremeCourtofFlorida,willbecommencedunder
3-7.6,unlessapleaissubmittedunderRule3-7.
NOTICE
MailingInstructions
The FloridaBarconverts its disciplinary files toelectronic media. All submissions are being scanned
into an electronic record hard copie.s are discarded. To help ensure the timely ofyour
inquiry/complaint,pleasereviewthefollowingguidelinespriorto sublnittingittoouroffice.
1. Please limit your submission to no more than 25 pages including exhibits. Ifyou have
additional documents available, please make reference to them in your written submission as
available upon request. Should Bar counsel need to obtain copies ofany such documents, a
subsequentrequestwillbesenttoyou.
2. Please do not .bind, or index your documents. You may underline but do not highlight
documents under anycircumstances. We documents for use in our disciplinary files and
when scanned, your doculnent highlighting will eith.er not be picked up or may obscure any
underlyingtext.
3. Please refrain from attaching mediasuch asaudio tapes orCDs, oversized or.
photographs.Wecannotprocfssanyn:ediathatcannotbescannedintotIleelectronicrecord.
4. Please do not submit your original documents. All documents will be discarded after
scan.ning and we will not be able to return any originals" submitted to our office. The only
originaldocument.thatshouldbeproyidedtoourofficeis theinquiry/complai?tform.
5. Please do notsubmit confidential or privileged information. Documents submitted to our
office become public rec.ord. Confidential/privileged information should be redacted. Such
infonl1ationincludes,butis notlill1itedto,ballkaccountnumbers, socialsecuritynumbers, credit
card ac.count nUlnbers, 111edical records, dependency nlatters, termination ofparental rights,
guardianadlitemrecords, childabuserecords, adoptionrecords, doclilnentscontainingnamesof
lninorchildren, original birth and death certificates, BakerActrecords, grandjuryrecords, and
juvenile delinquency Ifinformation ofthis nature is important to your submission,
pleasedescribethe natureofthe infonnation and indicate that it is available uponrequest. Bar
counsel will contact you to make appropriate arrangements for the protection ofany such
infonnation that isrequiredaspart of theinvestigation of the .complaint.
Pleasebeawarethatmaterialsreceivedthatdonotmeettheseguidelinesmaybereturned. ThaJ.lk
youforyourconsiderationinthisrespect.
THE FLORIDA BAR
651 EAST JEFFERSON STREET
JOHN F. HARKNESS, JR. TALLAHASSEE, FL 32399-2300 850/561-5600
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WWW.FLORIDABAR.ORG
December 6, 2013
Mr. Neil J. Gillespie
8092 S.W. 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
Re: Danielle Nicole Parsons; The Florida Bar File No. 2014-30,525 (9A)
Dear Mr. Gillespie:
Enclosed is a copy of our letter to Ms. Parsons which requires a response to your complaint.
Once you receive Ms. Parsons's response, you have 10 days to file a rebuttal if you so desire. If
you decide to file a rebuttal, you must send a copy to Ms. Parsons. Rebuttals should not exceed
25 pages and may refer to any additional documents or exhibits that are available on request. Please
address any and all correspondence to me. Please note that any correspondence must be sent
through the U.S. mail; we cannot accept faxed material.
Please be advised that as an arm of the Supreme Court of Florida, The Florida Bar can
investigate allegations of misconduct against attorneys, and where appropriate, request that the
attorney be disciplined. The Florida Bar cannot render legal advice nor can The Florida Bar
represent individuals or intervene on their behalf in any civil or crinlinal nlatter. Further, please
notify this office, in writing, of any pending civil, criminal, or administrative litigation which
pertains to this grievance. Please note that this is a continuing obligation should new litigation
develop during the pendency of this matter.
Please review the enclosed Notice on mailing instructions for information on submitting your
rebuttal.
Sincerely,
~ , ~ . <0 ..:
" . ~ ~ ~ .
Theodore P. Littlewood Jr., Bar Counsel
Attorney Consumer Assistance Program
ACAP Hotline 866-352-0707
Enclosures (Notice of Grievance Procedures, Copy of Letter to Ms. Parsons; Notice - Mailing
Instructions)
cc: Ms. Danielle Nicole Parsons
0
'$ ('Ill m u 1 " f *' .'1 ii' 'r' '$ j <,>, '.
,-"OPu, THE FLORIDA BAR
FIRST-CLASS MAIL
HasIer

\ 651 EAsT
J
EFFERSON STREET
TALLAHASSEE, FL 32399-2300 12/06/2013 $00 460
1 ,# -
, ..'

ZIP 32399
011011637246
Visit our web site: www.FLORIDABAR.org
8092 S.W. 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
3448i S-':'SE:7 RCi67
,,,,,,, ,Ill JIll I"" j JI JJIii, I, j JJ J"IJ;; 11II II jJJI JIIJ jI JIi1'1II
iii.! -" JJ x: (-'
-----------
THE FLORIDA BAR
INQUIRy/COMPLAINT FORM
PART ONE (See Pa2e 1, PART ONE - Required Information.):
Your Name: Neil 1. Gillespie Attorney's Nan1e: Danielle Nicole Parsons
Organization: n/a Address: 225 E. Robinson St., Suite 660
Address: 8092 SW 115th Loop City: Orlando State:
City: Ocala State: FL Zip Code: 32801 Telephone: 407-674-1850
Zip Code: 34481 Phone: 352-854-7807
ACAP Reference No. none
PART TWO (See Pa2e 1, PART TWO - Facts/Alle2ations.): The specific thing or things I am complaining about are:
See accompanying complaint.
PART THREE (See Page 1, PART THREE - Witnesses.): The witnesses in support of my allegations are: [see attached
sheet].
PART FOUR (See Page 1, PART FOUR - Signature.): Under penalties ofperjury, I declare that theforegoing facts are
true, correct and complete.
Date
J ohn F. Harkness, Executive Director Ghunise Coaxum, UPL Bar Counsel
The Florida Bar Florida Bar Orlando Branch Office
651 East J efferson Street 1000 Legion Place, Suite 1625
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2300 Orlando, Florida 32801-1050
Email: jharkness@flabar.org Email: N/A
VIA U.P.S. No. 1Z64589F0392969709 VIA U.P.S. No. 1Z64589FP293587311
Lori Holcomb, UPL Counsel, Unlicensed Patricia M. Moring, Chair
Practice Of Law Standing Committee Fifth Circuit UPL Committee
The Florida Bar, 651 East J efferson Street Moring & Moring, P.A.
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2300 7655 W. Gulf To Lake Hwy. Suite 12
Email: lholcomb@flabar.org Crystal River, Florida 34429-7910
VIA U.P.S. No. 1Z64589FP294475323 Email: pmoring@moringlaw.com
VIA U.P.S. No. 1Z64589FP291806499
December 2, 2013
Florida Bar Complaint against Danielle Nicole Parsons, FL Bar ID 29364, for her own
misconduct, and misconduct in supervision of her paralegal Yolanda I. Martinez.
Note: The Florida Bar is investigating me for UPL for representing my interests in his
matter, the wrongful foreclosure of my homestead on a HECM reverse mortgage.
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen of The Florida Bar:
Enclosed please find a signed Florida Bar inquiry/complaint form for Danielle Nicole Parsons,
FL Bar ID 29364, for her own misconduct, and misconduct in supervision of her paralegal
Yolanda I. Martinez, a non-lawyer. Ms. Parsons and Ms. Martinez are employed by McCalla
Raymer, LLC, 225 E. Robinson St., Suite 660, Orlando, FL 32801.
Wet-ink signed documents were provided to Mr. Harkness. Copies were provided otherwise.
[Rule 2.515(c), Fla.R.J ud.Admin.].
This inquiry/complaint against Danielle Nicole Parsons shows misconduct for Ms. Parsons, some
of which is attributable only to Ms. Parsons. Other misconduct by Ms. Parsons is related to UPL
and fraud of Ms. Martinez. Separately I made a UPL complaint against Yolanda I. Martinez, a
non-lawyer, which is presented with this Bar inquiry/complaint in a Separate Appendix. Due to
The Bars 25 page limit, the UPL Appendix for Ms. Martinez is not provided, but is available on
request. For The Bars convenience all the Exhibits and the UPL Appendix are posted on Scribd.
This inquiry/complaint against Danielle Nicole Parsons also shows misconduct for Ms. Parsons
as the attorney responsible for supervising Ms. Martinez. A member of The Florida Bar is
responsible for the work of a paralegal. Rule 10-2.1(b).
Rules Governing Unlicensed Practice, 10-2 Definitions
Rule 10-2.1. Generally
Florida Bar Complaint, Danielle Nicole Parsons December 2, 2013
McCalla Raymer LLC, Orlando Florida Page - 2
(b) Paralegal or Legal Assistant. A paralegal or legal assistant is a person qualified by
education, training, or work experience, who works under the supervision of a member of
The Florida Bar and who performs specifically delegated substantive legal work for
which a member of The Florida Bar is responsible. A nonlawyer or a group of
nonlawyers may not offer legal services directly to the public by employing a lawyer to
provide the lawyer supervision required under this rule. It shall constitute the unlicensed
practice of law for a person who does not meet the definition of paralegal or legal
assistant to use the title paralegal, legal assistant, or other similar term in offering to
provide or in providing services directly to the public.
Table of Contents
Section I. P. 4 Cases involved, foreclosure of a HECM reverse mortgage; SCOTUS
Section II. P. 5 Rule 4-3.3 Candor Toward The Tribunal; Information Packet, Candor
Toward the Tribunal, UPL-paralegal, federal offenses, judicial misconduct
Section III. P. 7 Ms. Parsons Rule 4-3.3 Candor violations, state court Verified Complaint,
Misconduct by Ms. Parsons in state court, prior to removal to U.S.D.C.
Section IV. P. 13 UPL of paralegal Yolanda I. Martinez in federal court
Section V. P. 18 Fraud or impairment by Ms. Martinez/Ms. Parsons of federal case
Section VI. P. 19 Ex parte communication Ms. Martinez/Ms. Parsons, federal judicial officers
Section VII. P. 20 UPL of paralegal Yolanda I. Martinez in state court
Section VIII. E. 15 UPL investigation of Neil Gillespie for defending foreclosure of his home
Section IX. E. 15 Mr. Rodems legal advice to Gillespie on foreclosure of reverse mortgage
Section X. E. 15 Political persecution of Neil Gillespie by The Florida Bar et al.
Section XI. E. 15 U.S. Congressman Elijah E. Cummings letter to FHFA, McCalla Raymer
Section XII. E. 15 McCalla Raymer LLC, criminal enterprise for Atty. Gen. investigation
Section XIII. E. 15 Disability of Neil J . Gillespie, exploitation by McCalla Raymer/RMS
Overview
Danielle Nicole Parsons represents client Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. by and through
McCalla Raymer LLC, supported by paralegal Yolanda I. Martinez, in cases involving the
disputed foreclosure of my homestead on a Home Equity Conversion Mortgage
1
or HECM, a
FHA
2
reverse mortgage program administered by the United States Department of Housing
and Urban Development. (HUD).
My name is Neil J . Gillespie, a law-abiding, indigent, 57 year-old disabled single man, a
surviving reverse mortgage borrower and homeowner reluctantly appearing pro se to save my
home in a 55+community in Ocala Florida from wrongful foreclosure.

1
12 U.S.C. 1715z20 - Insurance of home equity conversion mortgages for elderly
homeowners, and 24 C.F.R. Part 206, Home Equity Conversion Mortgage Insurance.
2
The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) is a United States government agency.
Ms. Parsons repeatedly violated Rule 4-3.3 Candor Toward The Tribunal. Her Complaint filed in
state court was so misleading that I included The Bars Information Packet, Candor Toward the
Tribunal in my motion to dismiss. Ms. Parsonss misconduct in federal court, her Agreed To
Motion For Extension of Time (Doc. 11) was a fraud on the court aided by paralegal Martinez.
Henceforth I included a printout of The Bars Rule 4-3.3 Candor Toward The Tribunal in my
Rule 11 Motion for Sanctions, and Verified Objection To, And Motion For Relief From, A
Magistrate J udges Order (Doc. 12). I found Ms. Parsons to be a compete liar.
The American Bar Association reported online in the ABA Journal Law News Now a story May
17, 2013 by Debra Cassens Weiss, Law prof confesses: I am a sociopath. The article is adapted
from a memoir called Confessions of a Psychopath: A Life Spent Hiding in Plain Sight, written
under the pseudonym M. E. Thomas. As quoted from the ABA story:
Before becoming a trial lawyer, the author says she prosecuted misdemeanors in the
District Attorneys office and was an associate in a law firm. "My sociopathic traits make
me a particularly excellent trial lawyer," Thomas writes. "I'm cool under pressure. I feel
no guilt or compunction, which is handy in such a dirty business. Misdemeanor
prosecutors almost always have to walk into a trial with cases they've never worked on
before. All you can do is bluff and hope that you'll be able to scramble through it. The
thing with sociopaths is that we are largely unaffected by fear. Besides, the nature of the
crime is of no moral concern to me; I am interested only in winning the legal game."
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/law_prof_confesses_i_am_a_sociopath/
The American Bar Association reported online in the ABA Journal Law News Now a story
November 13, 2012 by Debra Cassens Weiss, The Legal Field Attracts Psychopaths, Author
Says; Not That There Is Anything Wrong with That. The story appears at the link below.
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/the_legal_field_attracts_psychopaths_author_says_not_
that_there_is_anything/
Any profession that does not see a problem with attracting Psychopaths will have difficulty
enforcing, for example, The Bars Rule 4-3.3 Candor Toward The Tribunal, inter alia.
Disabled pro se parties are vulnerable to attorney misconduct, which often denies them
meaningful access to justice in court proceedings. The American Bar Association is the national
representative of the legal profession. The ABA has reported in the above cited stories that the
legal field attracts psychopaths and sociopaths. Disabled pro se parties need protection from
opposing counsel who are psychopaths or sociopaths, or who use those psychopathic or
sociopathic litigation tactics, in order to guarantee disabled pro se parties due process and equal
protection rights. Disability accommodation is a reasonable way to assure access legal and court
services in a legal action in an effective and expeditious manner, as required by the Constitution
and laws of the United States of America, and the Constitution and laws of the State of Florida.
Ghunise Coaxum, UPL Bar Counsel, opened a vexatious UPL investigation of me for defending
my interest in this foreclosure, on the complaint of attorney Ryan Christopher Rodems, a partner
in the firm Barker, Rodems & Cook who formerly represented me. The UPL investigation of me
by The Florida Bar is political persecution that also includes U.S. J udge William Terrell Hodges,
and Florida attorney Eugene P. Castagliuolo, in retaliation for my Petition No. 12-7747 to the
U.S. Supreme Court seeking, inter alia, better regulation of the legal profession.
U.S. Congressman Elijah E. Cummings complained to the FHFA, the Federal Housing Finance
Administration, about fraud and misconduct by foreclosure mills, most of whom are Florida law
firms. McCalla Raymer LLC is named in the Congressmans letter to the FHFA. Unfortunately
the Florida Attorney General is not protecting Floridians from lawyers operating as criminals
who are wrongly taking homes from people under color of law without due process.
Section I. Cases involved, foreclosure of a HECM reverse mortgage; SCOTUS
Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. v. Neil J . Gillespie, et al., Marion County Florida, Fifth
J udicial Circuit, No. 42-2013CA-000115-AXXX-XX, a.k.a. case no. 2013-CA-000115.
Presiding. Hon. Hale Ralph Stancil, Florida Circuit Court J udge, trial judge Marion Co.
Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. v. Neil J . Gillespie, et al., removed February 4, 2013 to U.S.
District Court, Ocala Division, Middle District Florida, No. 5:13-cv-00058-WTH-PRL
Presiding. U.S. J udge William Terrell Hodges, Senior Status, trial judge Ocala Division
Presiding U.S. Magistrate J udge Philip R. Lammens, magistrate judge Ocala Division
Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. v. Neil J . Gillespie, et al., U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Eleventh Circuit, No. 13-11585-B.
This matter, inter alia, is before the Supreme Court of the United States, Petition No. 13-7280,
Neil J . Gillespie v. Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. et al. The Florida Bar is a cross-party for
political persecution of me in retaliation for me seeking a First Amendment redress of grievances
in Petition No. 12-7747, and the case with Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. and Neil J . Gillespie
v. Thirteenth J udicial Circuit Florida et al, 5:11-cv-539-WTH-TBS in U.S. District Court, Ocala.
Petition No. 13-7280 alleges UPL by Ms. Martinez in the Table of Contents, and on page 34:
UPL by paralegal Yolanda I. Martinez, McCalla Raymer, Rule 10-2.1(a), Ethics Opinion
70-62, activity which requires the attorney's personal judgment and participation;
Florida Court, see emails Aug-07-2013 Gillespie-Martinez (Sep. Vol. App No. 2);
District Court, see Rule 11 sanction motion (Doc. 15); Rule 55 motion for default
judgment, (Doc. 16); Rule 72/Rule 60(b)(3) Verified Objection to Magistrate Order (Doc.
17); Affidavit 28 U.S.C. 144 (Doc. 22)
If I had more time to make the petition I would have drawn a sharper point on the misconduct of
Ms. Parsons. Still, the pleadings speak for themselves, Ms. Parsons Verified Complaint to
Foreclose Home Equity Conversion Mortgage in Florida case no. 2013-CA-000115, and her
Agreed Motion For Extension of Time (Doc. 11) in federal case 5:13-cv-00058-WTH-PRL.
Section II. Rule 4-3.3 Candor Toward The Tribunal; UPL by a paralegal, federal
offenses, judicial misconduct
RULE 4-3.3 CANDOR TOWARD THE TRIBUNAL
(a) False Evidence; Duty to Disclose. A lawyer shall not knowingly:
(1) make a false statement of material fact or law to a tribunal;
(2) fail to disclose a material fact to a tribunal when disclosure is necessary to avoid
assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by the client;
(3) fail to disclose to the tribunal 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; or
(4) permit any witness, including a criminal defendant, to offer testimony or other
evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. A lawyer may not offer testimony that the
lawyer knows to be false in the form of a narrative unless so ordered by the tribunal. If a
lawyer has offered material evidence and thereafter comes to know of its falsity, the
lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures.
(b) Extent of Lawyer's Duties. The duties stated in subdivision (a) continue beyond the
conclusion of the proceeding and apply even if compliance requires disclosure of information
otherwise protected by rule 4-1.6.
(c) Evidence Believed to Be False. A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence that the lawyer
reasonably believes is false.
(d) Ex Parte Proceedings. In an ex parte proceeding a lawyer shall inform the tribunal of all
material facts known to the lawyer that will enable the tribunal to make an informed decision,
whether or not the facts are adverse.
Rule 102.1(b) of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar defines a paralegal as a person who
works under the supervision of a member of The Florida Bar and who performs specifically
delegated substantive legal work for which a member of The Florida Bar is responsible. Only
persons who meet the definition may call themselves paralegals.
Professional Ethics of The Florida Bar (Exhibit 1)
Ethics Opinion 70-62, February 12, 1971
Lay personnel may be used in a law office only to the extent that they are
delegated mechanical, clerical or administrative duties. The attorney may not
ethically delegate to a lay employee any activity which requires the attorney's
personal judgment and participation.
Paralegals in a law office and the unlicensed practice of law.(UPL Update)
Florida Bar News - February 15, 2004, by Ghunise Coaxum (Exhibits 2 and 3)
Attorneys rely on paralegals and other nonlawyer office staff to perform various
activities. Generally, the activity may constitute the unlicensed practice of law if
it is something that requires the attorney's independent judgment and
participation, and it is performed by the paralegal. See, The Florida Bar Ethics
Opinion, 70-62.
Fraud or Impairment of a legitimate government activity, 18 U.S.C. 371
The general conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. 371, creates an offense "[i]f two or more
persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the
United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose. (emphasis added).
See Project, Tenth Annual Survey of White Collar Crime, 32 Am. Crim. L. Rev. 137,
379-406 (1995)(generally discussing 371).
925 Obstructing or Impairing Legitimate Government Activity
1739 Offenses Related to Obstruction of J ustice Offenses
Deprivation of rights under color of law, 18 U.S.C. 242
DOJ Summary. Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color
of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the
Constitution or laws of the United States.
Conspiracy against rights, 18 U.S.C. 241.
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in
any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or
enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the
United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with
intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so
secured
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if
death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include
kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit
aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241
Letter May 28, 2013 from U.S. Senator Bill Nelson of Florida, and six pages of information on
making a complaint under the J udicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980, 28 U.S.C. 351-
364 ("Act"). (Exhibit 10). From page 13 of Petition No. 13-7280:
U.S. Senator Bill Nelson provided in his letter to me May 28, 2013 information on how
to make a complaint of judicial misconduct
3
. I believe the success rate is about zero for a
pro se litigant who makes a complaint of judicial misconduct, regardless of the
complaints merits.
Also, I am not familiar enough with the federal complaint process to make a judicial complaint. I
do not have time to stop and learn the process now. I am trying to save my home from wrongful
foreclosure. J udicial complaints, like Bar complaints, do not provide the complainant with any
useful relief. If time allows later, I may make a complaint then, if needed.
Section III Ms. Parsons Rule 4-3.3 Candor violations, state court Verified Complaint
Impeachment of Ms. Parsons Verified Complaint (Doc. 2)(Exhibit 4) is found in my Motion To
Dismiss Verified Complaint To Forecloses Home Equity Conversion Mortgage, filed February 4,
2013 in state court, and immediately removed to U.S. District Court, Ocala. (Doc. 5)(Exhibit 18)
I only filed one motion to dismiss and noted it was a response for me personally, and as a co-
trustee. For the sake of clarity, I only represent my interest in the trust. The other co-trustee, my
brother Mark Gillespie, is represented by counsel, Kaufman, Englett and Lynd, PLLC, which
filed Notice of Defendants Consent to J udgment in 42-2013CA-000115 for his interests.
Ms. Parsons verification of her Verified Complaint was a defective, a sham. For one thing,
there were no identifiable exhibits attached to the so-called Verified Complaint. The following
text is taken from my motion to dismiss, begining 17, filed as Document 5 in federal court.

3
Filing a Complaint of Judicial Misconduct or Judicial Disability Against A Federal Judge. The
process is governed by the J udicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980, 28 U.S.C. 351-364
(Act), and Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings, 248 F.R.D. 674
(2008)
PLAINTIFFS DEFECTIVE RULE 1.110(b) VERIFICATION OF THE COMPLAINT
No Identifiable Exhibits are Attached to the Verified Complaint
17. There are no Exhibits attached to the Verified Complaint that are identifiable with the
pleadings. The Verified Complaint alleges at paragraph 2, Copies of the Note and
Mortgage are attached as Exhibits "A" and "B," respectively. This is false. There is
nothing attached as Exhibits "A" and "B," respectively. Instead, defective copies of the
HECM Note and Second Note taken from the HUD complaint appear as Exhibits 11 and
12, and are missing the Direct Endorsement Allonge that became a permanent part of
said Note on May 29, 2008 (Exhibit 4) which date occurred a week before the HECM
closing J une 5, 2008, when the Note and Mortgage were executed and delivered from the
Borrowers to the Lender, Liberty Reverse Mortgage, Inc. Somehow Liberty sold a
nonexistent Note and Mortgage to Bank of America. This is a fatal defect to the chain of
custody of the HECM Note and Mortgage.
18. Likewise, defective copies of the HECM Mortgage and Second Mortgage taken from
the HUD complaint are attached as Exhibits 32 and 33, and show interlineation after
execution, hand-written alterations, not initialed and not dated, which vitiates the
Mortgage. This defect only became known to Neil Gillespie in J uly 2012 when he found
it filed with the Clerk.
19. Paragraph 3 of the Verified Complaint alleges, Copies of the relevant Assignments
of Mortgage are attached as Composite Exhibit "C." This is false. Nothing is attached as
Composite Exhibit "C." Instead, a single unmarked page, Assignment of Mortgage,
March 27, 2012, from Bank of America to the Plaintiff, appears at the end of the Verified
Complaint. Any previous assignments of mortgage are missing.
Ms. Parsons also misidentified this residential homestead foreclosure in a 55+community as a
commercial foreclosure on the Civil Cover sheet Form 1.997 attached to Verified Complaint. I
speculate this dishonesty was to make difficult asserting consumer defense claims.
THIS IS NOT A COMMERCIAL FORCLOSURE Counsels Misrepresentation: Civil
Cover Sheet Form 1.997 attached to Verified Complaint (Exhibit 17, this Bar complaint)
20. Counsel wrongly filed this action as a Commercial foreclosure $50,001 -$249,999
shown on Form 1.997 CIVIL COVER SHEET, II. TYPE OF CASE, attached to the
Verified Complaint, and signed by Plaintiffs counsel Danielle Parsons, who represented
I CERTIFY that the information I have provided in this cover sheet is accurate to the
best of my knowledge and belief. Counsels certification is false. This properly is the
homestead of Neil Gillespie under Section 4, Article X of the Florida Constitution. This
action is a Homestead residential foreclosure $50,001 -$249,999. Oak Run is a
residential senior citizen community. No commercial activity is permitted. The HECM
reverse mortgage was made on the residential property. It appears counsels false
declaration was intended to deceive the Clerk and the Court that this is a commercial
foreclosure, in violation of F.S. 837.06, False official statements.
F.S. 837.06, False official statements is the Perjury chapter
837.06 False official statements.Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in
writing with the intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his or her official
duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s.
775.082 or s. 775.083.
From my motion to dismiss page 39, 149:
Supreme Court of Florida and The Verification Rule
149. On February 11, 2011, the Supreme Court of Florida decided it was time to address
the so-called lost note count and released In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Civil
Procedure. Among other things, this opinion called for an amendment to Rule 1.110(b) of
the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure to require verification of mortgage foreclosure
complaints involving residential real property. In an effort to end fraud on the court by
foreclosing plaintiffs, the Supreme Court now required parties to verify, under penalty of
perjury, that the information in the complaint is true and correct to the best of their
knowledge and belief.
150. The Verified Complaint alleges at paragraph 4 entitlement to enforce the Note
and Mortgage, but the Plaintiff has not provided copies of the Note and Mortgage as
pled. Therefore the Verified Complaint fails to state a cause of action and must be
dismissed.
151. The Plaintiff alleged in the Verified Complaint, paragraph 2, Copies of the Note
and Mortgage are attached as Exhibits A and B respectively. Plaintiffs statement is
false. There are no Exhibits A and B attached to the Complaint. The only exhibits
attached to the Complaint are numbered, not lettered. Those exhibits are numbered 11,
12, 32 and 33 and therefore impossible to relate to the Verified Complaint or the
Plaintiffs alleged claims therein.
152. The Verified Complaint, in paragraph 3, states The described subject Mortgage
was subsequently assigned to Plaintiff. Copies of the relevant Assignments of Mortgage
are attached as Composite Exhibit "C." Plaintiffs statement is false. There is no
Composite Exhibit C attached to the Complaint. There is a single page attached
purporting to be an Assignment of Mortgage attached but it is not marked in any way as
an Exhibit or Composite and therefore impossible to relate to the Verified Complaint or
the Plaintiffs alleged claims therein..
153. The Verified Complaint is verified pursuant to Rule 1.110(b), Fla. R. Civ. P., by
Debbie Sims, Vice President, Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc., on December 20, 2012,
and includes the following statement:
UNDER PENALTY OF PERJ URY, I declare that I have read the foregoing and that the
facts alleged therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
154. Debbie Sims, under penalty of perjury, declared that she read the Verified
Complaint and that the facts alleged therein were true and correct. The Verified
Complaint at paragraph 2 states a fact: Copies of the Note and Mortgage are attached as
Exhibits A and B respectively. This fact is not true and correct. This statement is
false. Exhibits A and B are not attached.
155. Debbie Sims, under penalty of perjury, declared that she read the Verified
Complaint and that the facts alleged therein were true and correct. The Verified
Complaint at paragraph 3 states a fact: Copies of the relevant Assignments of Mortgage
are attached as Composite Exhibit "C." This fact is not true and correct. This statement
is false. Composite Exhibit C is not attached.
FRAUD ON THE COURT
Perjury by Debbie Sims Intended to Mislead the Court
157. The Defendants respectfully requests the Court on its own initiative to DISMISS
WITH PREJ UDICE the Plaintiffs VERIFIED COMPLAINT TO FORECLOSE HOME
EQUITY CONVERSION MORTGAGE as a sanction imposed for perjury by Debbie
Sims who verified for the Plaintiff under penalty of perjury facts as true and correct,
when those facts were not true and correct, contrary to her Verification as Vice President
for the Plaintiff made under Rule 1.110(b) Fla.R.Civ.P.
158. Debbie Sims, by alleging facts under penalty of perjury as true and correct, when
those facts are not true and correct, violated section 837.06, Florida Statutes, False
official statements.
837.06 False official statements.Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in
writing with the intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his or her
official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as
provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
Debbie Sims knowingly made a false statement in writing with the intent to mislead this
Court to benefit the Plaintiff in this HECM reverse mortgage residential home
foreclosure.
Danielle N. Parsons, Esq. - Officer of the Court
Lack of Candor Before The Tribunal
159. Plaintiffs counsel, Danielle N. Parsons, Esq. (Fla. Bar No.: 0029364), submitted
the Verified Complaint to the Court and bears responsibility for perjury by Debbie Sims
made on behalf of the Plaintiff in this residential mortgage foreclosure. As an attorney,
Ms. Parsons is an officer of this Court, and her conduct is subject to judicial supervision
and scrutiny:
Attorney is an officer of the court and an essential component of the
administration of
justice, and, as such, his conduct is subject to judicial supervision and scrutiny.
State ex rel. Florida Bar v. Evans, 94 So.2d 730 (1957).
As an attorney, Ms. Parsons must comply with the Rules of Professional Conduct,
including candor before the tribunal, as described in the Florida Bar Informational
Packet, Candor Before The Tribunal, provided in Defendants Composite A. The
lawyer's duty not to assist witnesses, including the lawyer's own client, in offering false
evidence stems from the Rules of Professional Conduct, Florida statutes, and caselaw.
Rule 4-1.2(d) prohibits the lawyer from assisting a client in conduct that the lawyer
knows or reasonably should know is criminal or fraudulent.
Rule 4-3.4(b) prohibits a lawyer from fabricating evidence or assisting a witness to testify
falsely.
Rule 4-8.4(a) prohibits the lawyer from violating the Rules of Professional Conduct or
knowingly assisting another to do so.
Rule 4-8.4(b) prohibits a lawyer from committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on
the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer.
Rule 4-8.4(c) prohibits a lawyer from engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud,
deceit, or misrepresentation.
Rule 4-8.4(d) prohibits a lawyer from engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the
administration of justice.
Rule 4-1.6(b) requires a lawyer to reveal information to the extent the lawyer reasonably
believes necessary to prevent a client from committing a crime.
This rule, 4-3.3(a)(2), requires a lawyer to reveal a material fact to the tribunal when
disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by the client, and 4-
3.3(a)(4) prohibits a lawyer from offering false evidence and requires the lawyer to take
reasonable remedial measures when false material evidence has been offered.
Rule 4-1.16 prohibits a lawyer from representing a client if the representation will result
in a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct or law and permits the lawyer to
withdraw from representation if the client persists in a course of action that the lawyer
reasonably believes is criminal or fraudulent or repugnant or imprudent. Rule 4-1.16(c)
recognizes that notwithstanding good cause for terminating representation of a client, a
lawyer is obliged to continue representation if so ordered by a tribunal.
160. Florida caselaw prohibits lawyers from presenting false testimony or evidence.
Kneale v. Williams, 30 So. 2d 284 (Fla. 1947), states that perpetration of a fraud is
outside the scope of the professional duty of an attorney and no privilege attaches to
communication between an attorney and a client with respect to transactions constituting
the making of a false claim or the perpetration of a fraud. Dodd v. The Florida Bar, 118
So. 2d 17 (Fla. 1960), reminds us that "the courts are . . . dependent on members of the
bar to . . . present the true facts of each cause . . . to enable the judge or the jury to
[decide the facts] to which the law may be applied. When an attorney . . . allows false
testimony . . . [the attorney] . . . makes it impossible for the scales [of justice] to balance."
See The Fla. Bar v. Agar, 394 So. 2d 405 (Fla. 1981), and The Fla. Bar v. Simons, 391
So. 2d 684 (Fla. 1980). To permit or assist a client or other witness to testify falsely is
prohibited by F.S. 837.02 which makes perjury in an official proceeding a felony, and
by F.S. 777.011 which proscribes aiding, abetting, or counseling commission of a
felony.
SANCTIONS: DISMISS THE FORECLOSURE WITH PREJ UDICE
161. The Court has the inherent power to sanction perjury, misconduct and other fraud by
the Plaintiff. A plain reading of section 57.105(1) Florida Statutes shows sanctions may
be awarded upon the courts initiative. The Defendant respectfully requests this Court
sanction the Plaintiff upon the courts initiative and Dismiss the Foreclosure with
Prejudice.
DISABILITY OF NEIL GILLESPIE
162. Neil Gillespie is an indigent, fifty-six (56) year-old single man, law-abiding, late-
in-life college educated, and a former business owner, disabled with physical and mental
impairments. Neil Gillespie has a record of craniofacial disorder and speech impairment
since birth. Neil Gillespie has a record of traumatic brain injury sustained in 1988. The
record shows Neil Gillespie suffers from depression, post traumatic stress disorder
(PTSD), diabetes type II adult onset, traumatic brain injury (TBI), velopharyngeal
incompetence (VPI), craniofacial disorder, and impaired hearing. Social Security
determined Neil Gillespie totally disabled in 1993. The Florida Division of Vocational
Rehabilitation (DVR) approve a rehabilitation plan in 1994, but denied Neil Gillespie
services in 1997 when it determined his disability was too severe for services to result in
employment. Neil Gillespie is also regarded as impaired by others.
163. Neil Gillespie initially requested J anuary 13, 2013 disability accommodation in
this HECM foreclosure to Tameka Gordon, ADA Coordinator, Marion County J udicial
Center, with a copy to Plaintiffs counsel Ms. Parsons. Neil Gillespie will file a motion
under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) with specific requests for disability
accommodation.
Section IV UPL of paralegal Yolanda I. Martinez in federal court
Pleadings showing UPL, or related to Unlicensed Practice of Law, by Ms. Martinez:
Rule 11 Motion For Sanctions Danielle N. Parsons McCalla Raymer, LLC
Document 15, filed February 26, 2013
Rule 55 Motion For Default J udgment, Document 16, filed February 26, 2013
Rule 72/Rule 60 Verified Objection, Motion For Relief, Magistrate J udges Order (Doc.
12) Document 17, filed March 5, 2013
Affidavit of Neil J . Gillespie, 28 U.S.C. 144, Document 22, filed April 8, 2013.
My Rule 11 Motion shows Ms. Martinez engaged in UPL by email Thursday, February 21,
2013 2:52 PM as held in Ethics Opinion 70-62 when she engaged in activity which requires
the attorney's personal judgment and participation. [Ethics Opinion 70-62]
Specially, Ms. Martinez:
1. Conducted with me by email a conference pursuant to Local Rule 3.01(g), M.D. FL
2. During the Rule 3.01(g) conference, Ms. Martinez knowingly misrepresented to me by
email the legal date Plaintiffs response to my Motion to Dismiss was due:
Our response to your Motion to Dismiss is due today per the Federal Court Rules
and at this time we are requesting an extension of time to file a reply to the
Motion to Dismiss of 20 days or on or before March 13, 2013.
The email of Ms. Martinez appears at Exhibit A to my Rule 11 Motion For Sanctions.
(Doc. 15). The email of Ms. Martinez accompanies this UPL complaint as Exhibit 5.
Local Rule 3.01(g):
(g) Before filing any motion in a civil case, except a motion for injunctive relief, for
judgment on the pleadings, for summary judgment, to dismiss or to permit maintenance
of a class action, to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted,
or to involuntarily dismiss an action, the moving party shall confer with counsel for the
opposing party in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised by the motion, and shall
file with the motion a statement (1) certifying that the moving counsel has conferred with
opposing counsel and (2) stating whether counsel agree on the resolution of the motion.
A certification to the effect that opposing counsel was unavailable for a conference
before filing a motion is insufficient to satisfy the parties obligation to confer. The
moving party retains the duty to contact opposing counsel expeditiously after filing and
to supplement the motion promptly with a statement certifying whether or to what extent
the parties have resolved the issue(s) presented in the motion. If the interested parties
agree to all or part of the relief sought in any motion, the caption of the motion shall
include the word unopposed, agreed, or stipulated or otherwise succinctly inform
the reader that, as to all or part of the requested relief, no opposition exists.
Ms. Martinez engaged in UPL because a Rule 3.01(g) conference is activity which requires the
attorney's personal judgment and participation. Furthermore, Rule 3.01(g) does not provide for
a conference with an unrepresented nonlawyer party. I am not a lawyer, and am not subject to the
plain language of the local rule, which specifies opposing counsel or counsel.
Plaintiffs counsel Ms. Parsons did not respond to any of my Rule 3.01(g) attempts to confer, and
I noted her failure in the three pleadings above.
Ms. Martinez further engaged in UPL by purporting to determine a legal deadline to respond to
my motion to dismiss under Federal Court Rules; Ms. Martinez knew the information she
provided was wrong, and provided with a corrupt purpose. Notwithstanding the knowing
falsehood with malice aforethought about the deadline, she waited until 1 hour and 8 minutes
before the Court closed at 4:00 PM. This is not a good faith effort under Rule 301(g).
My Rule 55 Motion For Default J udgment, Document 16, filed February 26, 2013, shows:
1. Rule 55(a), F.R.C.P., Entering a Default. When a party against whom a judgment for
affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend, and that failure is
shown by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk must enter the party's default. In this case the
Plaintiff failed to respond within 14 days (Rule 12(a)(4)) to Gillespies motion to dismiss
filed February 4, 2013. The time for default was February 19, 2013
4
. The Plaintiff has
defaulted and Gillespie is entitled to a Default J udgment.
2. Gillespie filed contemporaneously with this motion a Rule 11 Motion for Sanctions
against Plaintiffs Counsel Danielle N. Parsons and the law firm McCalla Raymer, LLC.
The motion shows that Ms. Parsons mislead the Court and Gillespie in her Agreed
Motion For Extension of Time (Doc. 11). Ms. Parsons and her staff also misled
Gillespie regarding the good-faith conference pursuant to Middle District Local Rule
3.01(g). Gillespie respectfully incorporates his Rule 11 Motion for Sanctions into this
Rule 55 Motion for Default J udgment.
3. In reliance upon Ms. Parsons misrepresentations, this Court entered an Order (Doc.
12). Unfortunately, due to Ms. Parsons misrepresentations to the Court in her Agreed
Motion For Extension of Time (Doc. 11), the Order should rescind the Order. (Doc. 12).

4
The Court was closed Monday February 18, 2013 for Presidents Day, the actual due date.
My Rule 72/Rule 60 Verified Objection, Motion For Relief, Magistrate J udges Order (Doc.
12) Document 17, filed March 5, 2013.
Appearing pro se, Defendants, NEIL J . GILLESPIE, and NEIL J . GILLESPIE CO-
TRUSTEE, (herein after Gillespie) hereby make a verified objection under Fed. R. Civ.
P. 72 to the Magistrate J udges Order (Doc. 12) entered February 22, 2013. In addition to
and in the alternative to the relief sought above, Gillespie moves under Fed. R. Civ. P.
60(b)(3) for relief from the Magistrate J udges Order (Doc. 12) entered February 22,
2013, and states:
1. Magistrate J udge Philip R. Lammens entered an Order (Doc. 12) February 22, 2013
granting the Plaintiff relief based on Ms. Parsons Agreed Motion For Extension of
Time filed the previous day February 21, 2013 (Doc. 11). Unfortunately Ms. Parsons
motion was a fraud on the Court wherein she made false statements and material
misrepresentations, and engaged in misconduct, set forth in Gillespies Rule 11 Motion
For Sanctions Against Danielle N. Parsons and McCalla Raymer, LLC (Doc. 15).
Gillespies Rule 11 motion shows Ms. Parsons missed a deadline to file a response to
Gillespies Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 5), and engaged in fraud, misrepresentation and
misconduct to secure an extension to file a response, when in fact the Plaintiff defaulted
and Gillespie was entitled to a Default J udgment. (Doc. 16). Gillespie moved for Default
J udgment February 26, 2013. (Doc. 16).
2. Ms. Parsons made a number of false statements and material misrepresentations to the
Court in her motion (Doc. 11) intended to mislead the Court and federal judge(s) for the
purpose of advantage to: A. Cover-up Counsels incompetence and lack of diligence for
not timely filing a response to the motion to dismiss, a response due February 19, 2013.
(Rule 12(a)(4)); and B. Trick Gillespie into believing Plaintiffs response was due J anuary
21, 2013, when otherwise he could move for Default J udgment. (Rule 55). (Doc. 15, 8).
3. Gillespie respectfully incorporates into this pleading the following related pleadings he
previously submitted to the Court, including:
Rule 11 Motion For Sanctions Against Danielle N. Parsons And McCalla
Raymer, LLC (Doc. 15), filed February 26, 2013
Rule 55 Motion For Default J udgment (Doc. 16), filed February 26, 2013
Objections To Magistrate J udge Philip R. Lammens Report and
Recommendation, filed March 4, 2013.
4. Ms. Parsons made several material representations to the Court in her Certification
Pursuant To Middle District Local Rule 3.01(g) (Doc. 11) that stated:
Counsel for Plaintiff hereby advises this Honorable Court that it has attempted in
good faith to confer with pro se Defendant, Neil Gillespie via electronic mail as
this is the only form of communication we have. Counsel sent an email to Mr.
Gillespie advising him that we were in need of an extension. Defendant, Neil
Gillespie, has agreed to the within request for an extension of time.
First, Counsel did not contact Gillespie at any time to confer in good faith as required
by Local Rule 3.01(g). Ms. Parsons misled the Court when she wrote electronic mail is
the only form of communication we have. Gillespies home telephone number is
provided on all his pleadings, on his Florida Rule 2.516 notice in state court, and is listed
on the Courts civil docket along with his home address. Ms. Parsons further lied to the
Court when she wrote Counsel sent an email to Mr. Gillespie advising him that we were
in need of an extension. Ms. Parsons did not send Gillespie an email advising that she
was in need of an extension. Instead, Yolanda I. Martinez, paralegal to Ms. Parsons,
contacted Gillespie by email February 21, 2013 at 2.52 PM for the purpose of misleading
Gillespie about the extension: (Doc. 15., 9). (Exhibit A).
Unfortunately Ms. Martinez misrepresented to Gillespie in her email that Our
response to your Motion to Dismiss is due today per the Federal Court Rules...
The statement of Ms. Martinez is false. The Plaintiffs response was due two days
earlier, February 19, 2013. The false statement made in connection with the Local
Rule 3.01(g) was not made in good faith as required, and denied Gillespie
informed consent in which to respond.
5. Ms. Parsons misrepresented to the Court February 21, 2013 in her Agreed Motion For
Extension of Time (Doc. 11) as follows:
In paragraph 1: On or about February 6, 2013, Defendant, Neil Gillespie, filed
its Motion to Dismiss with the Court.
Ms. Parsons statement is false. Ms. Parsons knows that Gillespie filed his Motion to
Dismiss with the Court (Doc. 5) on February 4, 2013, a date certain, and no other date.
Gillespies Motion to Dismiss shows when it was filed on the docket, and on the top of
the document: Case 5:13-cv-00058-WTH-PRL Document 5 Filed 02/04/13 Page 1
of 47 PageID 86
In paragraph 2: Pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a response is
due to the Motion to Dismiss on or about February 21, 2013.
Ms. Parsons statement is false. In fact, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
a response was due to the Motion to Dismiss on J anuary 19, 2013
5
, a date certain and no
other date. Accordingly the Plaintiff is in default and Gillespie is entitled to a Default

5
J udgment.
7. Gillespie agreed to extend the time for Ms. Parsons to file a response, but that was
based on a false statement by Plaintiffs Counsel [through paralegal Ms. Martinez].
Gillespie did not agree to Counsel making false statements or representations during the
good-faith conference required by Local Rule 3.01(g), and/or filing a false record of
events with the Court, which appears calculated to:
A. Cover-up Counsels incompetence and lack of diligence for not timely filing a
response to the motion to dismiss, a response due February 19, 2013. (Rule
12(a)(4))
B. Trick Gillespie into believing Plaintiffs response was due J anuary 21, 2013,
when otherwise he could move for Default J udgment. (Rule 55).
8. Ms. Parsons further misrepresented to the Court in paragraph 5, No parties will be
prejudiced by the granting of this extension of time. (Doc. 11, 5). Ms. Parsons
statement is false. Gillespie is prejudiced because he is entitled to a Default J udgment.
Gillespie moved for Default J udgment February 26, 2013. (Doc. 16).
14. Gillespie requested in his Notice of Removal (Doc. 1, p 4, 16) that any rulings made
by a U.S. Magistrate J udge be in conformity with the Report and Recommendation
format. The subject Order (Doc. 12) was not made in a Report and Recommendation
format.
My Affidavit of Neil J . Gillespie, 28 U.S.C. 144, Document 22, filed April 8, 2013, shows:
13. U.S. Congressman Elijah E. Cummings wrote February 25, 2011 to Inspector General
Linick of Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) asking that he initiate an
investigation into widespread allegations of abuse by private attorneys and law firms
hired to process foreclosures as part of the "Retained Attorney Network"...
14. The Plaintiff in this case is represented by McCalla Raymer, LLC. The letter of Rep.
Cummings complains about McCalla Raymer, LLC by name:
Another firm in the Retained Attorney Network, McCalla Raymer, L.L.C., is a
defendant in a federal lawsuit in which the plaintiffs allege that it engaged in
fraud, racketeering, and the manufacture of fraudulent foreclosure documents.
Reportedly, this firm established operations in Florida under the name Stone,
McGehee & Silver and hired ten former Stern law firm employees. The firm
Stone, McGehee and Silver, LLC, dba McCalla Raymer currently appears as a
"Designated Counsel/Trustee" in Florida for Freddie Mac.
15. Unfortunately McCalla Raymer, LLC is now doing business in Florida under its own
name in Orlando Florida. I have personal knowledge of this firms misconduct in this case.
16. On February 26, 2013 I filed a Rule 11 Motion For Sanctions Against Danielle N.
Parsons And McCalle Raymer, LLC (Doc 15). The Court has not ruled on my motion.
17. On February 26, 2013 I filed a Rule 55 Motion For Default J udgment (Doc. 16.)
The Court has not ruled on my motion.
18. On March 5, 2013 I filed a Verified Objection To, And Motion For Relief From, A
Magistrate J udges Order (Doc. 12) under Fed. R. Civ. P 72, and Rule 60(b)(3). The
Court has not ruled on my motion.
25. [relevant portion only] [Note: Ms. Parsons of McCalla Raymer, LLC filed a
fraudulent civil cover sheet in the state court foreclosure of the subject mortgage.]
25. (number 25 repeated by mistake in the pleading)Unfortunately, I do not believe I can
get a fair hearing in any Florida state or federal court due to the corrupting power and
influence of The Florida Bar set forth in Petition 12-7747.
Section V Fraud or impairment by Ms. Martinez/Ms. Parsons of the federal case
Evidence shows Yolanda I. Martinez, Danielle N. Parsons, and McCalla Raymer, LLC, engaged
in fraud or impairment of case 5:13-cv-00058-WTH-PRL
My Rule 11 Motion shows Ms. Martinez emailed me Thursday, February 21, 2013 at 2:52.
Ms. Martinez knowingly misrepresented to me by email the legal date Plaintiffs response to my
Motion to Dismiss was due:
The email of Ms. Martinez appears at Exhibit A to my Rule 11 Motion For Sanctions. (Doc. 15).
The email of Ms. Martinez accompanies this UPL complaint as Exhibit 5.
of 47 PageID 86
a response was due to the Motion to Dismiss on J anuary 19, 2013[fn2], a date certain and
no other date. Accordingly the Plaintiff is in default and Gillespie is entitled to a Default
J udgment. [fn2] The Court was closed Monday February 18, 2013 for Presidents Day,
the actual due date.
prejudiced by the granting of this extension of time. Ms. Parsons statement is false.
Gillespie is prejudiced because he is entitled to a Default J udgment....
My Rule 55 Motion For Default J udgment, Document 16, filed February 26, 2013, shows the
Plaintiff defaulted and I am entitled to a Default J udgment.
Section VI Ex parte communication Ms. Martinez/Ms. Parsons, federal judicial officers
Evidence shows Ms. Martinez and Ms. Parsons, thru McCalla Raymers email service, engaged
in ex parte communication with U.S. J udge Hodges and U.S. Magistrate J udge Lammens.
The Order (Doc. 12) entered February 22, 2013 by U.S. Magistrate J udge Lammens arrived by
U.S. Mail first class to me with additional papers that show email communication between the
Court and Yolanda I. Martinez at yim@mccallaraymer.com. This is unusual because the Court
did not communicate by email with Tiffany Caparas of Kaufman, Englett & Lynd, PLLC,
counsel of record for Mark Gillespie et al. [compare, yolanda.martinez@mccallaraymer.com]
Tellingly the Court did not use McCalla Raymers designated primary email for service pursuant
to Fla. R. J ud. Admin 2.516, mrservice@mccallaraymer.com
See Ms. Parsons Notice of Compliance with Rule 2.516 and Designation of Email Address in
state court: MRService@mccallaraymer.com (Exhibit 14)
The Court shows this information on a paper sent to me. (Exhibit 6).
5:13-cv-00058-WTH-PRL Notice has been electronically mailed to: Danielle N. Parsons
dnp@mccallaraymer.com, yim@mccallaraymer.com
The signature block of Ms. Martinezs email shows yolanda.martinez@mccallaraymer.com, but
yim@mccallaraymer.com appears in the caption section of email of Ms. Martinez.
Tellingly the Court did not send email to Tiffany Caparas of Kaufman, Englett & Lynd, PLLC,
counsel of record. Instead Ms. Caparas was provided notice delivered by other means. I got the
notice [the Order Doc. 12] delivered by other means, by US Mail first class. (Exhibit 6).
Tellingly Magistrate Lammens entered the Order (Doc. 12) on Plaintiffs motion the next day.
The Order (Doc. 12) was entered February 22, 2013 but was not mailed to me until February 25,
2013 according to the Courts postage meter imprint. Unfortunately the U.S. District Court for
the Middle District of Florida has a discriminatory pro se policy that prohibits e-filing and access
to the Courts CM/ECF system for pro se litigants, consumers of legal and court services
affecting interstate commerce. My motion has been pending since February 6, 2013 for
authorization to file electronically (Doc. 7), so that I may access legal and court services in this
action in an effective and expeditious manner, as provided by the Constitution and laws of the
United States, and Constitution and laws of the state of Florida.
I requested in my Notice of Removal (Doc. 1, p 4, 16) that any rulings made by a U.S.
Magistrate J udge be in conformity with the Report and Recommendation format. The subject
Order (Doc. 12) was not made in conformity the Report and Recommendation format.
The above email scenario was repeated in the following decisions by the Court:
Order Remanding Case (Doc. 19) by US J udge Hodges, March 7, 2013:
J udgment in a Civil Case (Doc. 20) by Clerk Sheryl L Loesch March 11, 2013,
Order (Doc. 24) by US J udge Hodges, April 12, 2013 (denied inter alia my affidavit 28 USC 144)
Section VII UPL of paralegal Yolanda I. Martinez in state court
Yolanda I. Martinez engaged in UPL by email on Wednesday, August 07, 2013 when she
engaged in activity which requires the attorney's personal judgment and participation. [Ethics
Opinion 70-62]. Specifically Ms. Martinez provided me legal advice on the meaning of an Order
entered J uly 25, 2013 by the U.S. Eleventh Circuit in Appeal Number: 13-11585-B.
Ms. Martinezs UPL began with her email to me August 07, 2013 1:44 PM: (Exhibit 7).
Case No.: 2013-CA-000115
Mr. Gillespie:
We would like to set a hearing on your Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint before
the Honorable Hale R. Stancil. In that regard I have contacted the J udge's J udicial
Assistant and she has provided me with the following available dates and times for
the hearing:
Tuesday, September 3, 2013 between the hours of 1-5
Friday, September 6, 2013 between the hours of 1-5
We would like to secure a 15 minute hearing time during those hours. Kindly let me
know which date and time works best for you so that I can contact the judge and
secure our hearing time.
Thank you.
Yolanda I. Martinez,
Paralegal to: Danielle N. Parsons
I responded to Ms. Martinez by email August 07, 2013 4:07 PM. (Exhibit 8).
Dear Ms. Martinez:
Good afternoon. I object to any hearings in state court until the Eleventh Circuit Court of
Appeals rules on my petition for mandamus relief. Attached is my letter to the court,
served yesterday to Ms. Parsons at mrservice@mccallaraymer.com Thank you.
Sincerely,
Neil J . Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
(352) 854-7807.
I provided my responsive email to Ms. Martinez, and to the following persons by email,
including the trial judge, the Hon. Hale Ralph Stancil:
"Yolanda Martinez" <yim@mccallaraymer.com>;
<TCaparas@kelattorneys.com>;
"Hon. Hale Ralph Stancil" <hstancil@circuit5.org>;
"J ane Bond" <jane.bond@mccallaraymer.com>;
"Robyn Katz" <rrk@mccallaraymer.com>;
"Curtis Wilson" <Caw@McCallaRaymer.com>
Cc: "Danielle Parsons" <dnp@mccallaraymer.com>;
"Mark Gillespie" <mark.gillespie@att.net>;
"Neil Gillespie" <neilgillespie@mfi.net>
Ms. Martinez responded to me by email August 07, 2013 4:18 PM. (Exhibit 9).
Mr. Gillespie:
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has rendered its decision and has denied your Motion
for Reconsideration as you can see from the attached Order. In that regard, kindly advise
as to your availability for a hearing in the Circuit court.
Thank you.
The legal interpretation of the Order Ms. Martinez provided me by email was UPL because she
Opinion 70-62]. In addition Ms. Martinez provided false and misleading information about the
Order entered J uly 25, 2013 by the U.S. Eleventh Circuit in Appeal Number: 13-11585-B.
I responded to Ms. Martinez by email August 07, 2013 4:50 PM: (Exhibit 10).
Dear Ms. Martinez:
Appeals rules on my petition for mandamus relief.
Unfortunately you are not reading the order properly. Kindly consult with an attorney at
your firm. The decision entered allows a separate petition for mandamus relief. The U.S.
Eleventh Circuit entered a favorable Order J uly 25, 2013 that states in relevant part:
"Should Gillespie wish to petition for mandamus relief, he may file a separate petition for
a writ of mandamus or prohibition with this Court. See 28 U.S.C. 1651;
Fed.R.App.P.21".
This was the only option the court had, which is why it denied the motion to reconsider a
remand for lack of jurisdiction, but offered mandamus relief. Corporate Mgmt. Advisors,
Inc. 561 F.3d 1294, 1296 (11th Cir. 2009) held the failure to allege facts sufficient to
establish subject matter jurisdiction in a notice of removal is a defect in the removal
procedure, and consequently, the district court cannot sua sponte remand a case to state
court on that ground.
A writ of mandamus is the proper means by which a party may challenge a remand order.
Thermtron Products, Inc. v. Hermansdorfer, 423 U.S. 336, 352-53, 96 S.Ct. 584, 593-94,
46 L.Ed.2d 542 (1976). A remand order based on subject matter jurisdiction is not
reviewable by appeal. 28 U.S.C. 1447(d). But such remand order entered sua sponte is
a defect in the removal process within the meaning of 1447(c), and may be challenged
by writ of mandamus. New v. Sports & Recreation, Inc., 114 F.3d 1092, 1095-96 (11th
Cir. 1997).
In the past you and Ms. Parsons disrupted the tribunal in federal district court, and I hope
that does not happen again. Your misconduct is shown in the following pleadings in US
District Court, Middle District, Florida, Ocala Division, 5:13-cv-58-oc-WTH-PRL
Rule 11 sanction motion, Ms. Parsons, McCalla Raymer (Doc. 15)
Florida Bar Complaint, Danielle Nicole Parsons
McCalla Raymer LLC, Orlando Florida
December 2, 2013
Page - 23
G-illespie default motion, Rule 55 (Doc. 16)
Gillespie Verified Objection to Magistrate Order Doc. 12 (Doc. 17)
Unfortunately you and Ms. Parsons appear to have engaged in misconduct with the either
US Judge Hodges or Magistrate Judge Lammens. I alerted federal authorities. Attached
you will find a letter from U.S. Senator Bill Nelson instructing me on how to make a
formal complaint under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980...
So, I object to any hearings in state court until the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals
rules on my petition for mandamus relief, which is allowed in the order you attached.
However you, Ms. Parsons and foreclosure mill McCalla Raymer are free to do whatever
you like, subject to law.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Neil J. Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
(352) 854-7807.
I did not hear back from Ms. Martinez or Ms. Parsons. No hearing was set in state court. The
email was sent to the persons shown above, including Judge Stancil.
After the Eleventh Circuit Order was entered July 25, 2013, the Clerk provided instructions on
n1aking a petition for writ of certiorari in forma pauperis to the U.S. Supreme Court, which was
filed October 23, 2013 as Petition No. 13-7280. Ultimately I chose that option over the C.A.11.
Ms. Parsons should be found guilty of misconduct, and permanently disbarred from the practice
of law, see Florida Standards For Applying Lawyer Discipline, Standard 6.11.
Under penalties of perjury, I declare that the foregoing facts are true, correct and complete.
Note: This Bar complaint exhausted The Florida Bar's 25 page limit, as follows: Bar complaint
form (1 page), this con1plaint (23 pages), and the Index to Exhibits (1 page).
Florida Bar Complaint - Danielle Nicole Parsons - December 2, 2013
Index to Exhibits - due to The Bars 25 page limit, Exhibits are available, not enclosed.
Exhibit 1 Ethics Opinion 70-62, The Florida Bar
Exhibit 2 Paralegals in a law office and the unlicensed practice of law. (UPL Update)
Florida Bar News - February 15, 2004, by Ghunise Coaxum
Exhibit 3 Invoice $5.95, Amazon Order J une 3, 2013, Paralegals in a law office and UPL
Exhibit 4 Plaintiffs Verified Complaint To Foreclose Home Equity Conversion Mortgage,
state court action 2013-115-CAT, removed to U.S.D.C. Ocala Division
Case 5:13-cv-00058-WTH-PRL Document 2 Filed 02/04/13 Page 1 of 38 PageID 32
Exhibit 5 Email of Yolanda I. Martinez, February 21, 2013 2.52 PM
Exhibit 6 Evidence of ex-parte email U.S. District Court and Danielle N. Parsons
Exhibit 7 August 7, 2013 email 1.44pm paralegal Martinez/McCalla Raymer LLC to Gillespie
Exhibit 8 August 7, 2013, email 4.07pm Gillespie to paralegal Yolanda Martinez/McCalla
Raymer LLC, w/attached letter to Clerk
Exhibit 9 August 7, 2013, email 4.18pm paralegal Yolanda Martinez/McCalla Raymer
LLC to Gillespie, w/attached court order denied reconsideration
Exhibit 10 August 7, 2013, email 4.50pm Gillespie to paralegal Yolanda Martinez/ McCalla
Raymer LLC, w/attached letter-Sen. Nelson w/information for judicial complaint
Exhibit 11 U.S. Congressman Elijah E. Cummings letter Feb-25-11 to FHFA, McCalla Raymer
Exhibit 12 Notice of Defendants' Consent to J udgment, case no. 2013-CA-000115
Exhibit 13 Gillespies denial of UPL accusation, Page 34, Petition No. 13-7280 SCOTUS
Exhibit 14 Ms. Parsons Notice of Compliance with Rule 2.516 and Designation of Email
Address: MRService@mccallaraymer.com
Exhibit 15 Sections VIII through XIII of the Bar Complaint
Exhibit 16 Agreed Motion for Extension of Time (Doc. 11). 5:13-cv-00058-WTH-PRL
Exhibit 17 Civil Cover Sheet Form 1.997 attached to Verified Complaint To Foreclose Home
Equity Conversion Mortgage, state court 2013-115-CAT
Exhibit 18 Defendants Motion to Dismiss Certified Complaint to Foreclose Home Equity
Conversion Mortgage, state court 2013-115-CAT, removed U.S.D.C. Ocala Div
Case 5:13-cv-00058-WTH-PRL Document 5 Filed 02/04/13 Page 1 of 47 PageID 86
TheFloridaBar
TheGatewayCenter
1000Legion Place,Suite1625
JohnF. Harkness,Jr.
Orlando,Florida32801-1050
(407)425-0473
ExecutiveDirector www.FLORIDABAR.org
December5, 2013
Ms. YolandaI. Martinez
225 E. RobinsonStreet
Orlando,FL32801
Re: UnlicensedPracticeofLawInvestigationofYolandaI. Martinez
CaseNo. 20143031(9A)
DearMs. Martinez:
IamBarCounselwiththeUnlicensedPracticeofLawDepartmentof TheFloridaBarin
Orlando. NeilJ. Gillespiehasallegedthatyouengagedintheunlicensedpracticeoflawontwo
(2)occasionswhenyoucommunicatedwithhimbye-mail. Ihaveenclosedacopyof the
complaintfor yourreference;however,thespecificactsareonpages7and 15.
CanyoupleaseprovideawrittenresponsetoMr. Gillespie'sallegationsthatyouengagedinthe
unlicensedpracticeoflawwhenyousenthimthefollowinge-mails:
OnFebruary21,2013: OurresponsetoyourMotiontoDismissisduetodayper
theFederalCourtRulesandatthistimewearerequestinganextensionof timetofile a
replytotheMotiontoDismissof20daysoronorbeforeMarch13,2013.
OnAugust7, 2013: The 11th CircuitCourtofAppealshasrendereditsdecisionandhas
deniedyourMotionforReconsiderationasyoucanseefromtheattachedOrder. Inthat
regard,kindlyadviseastoyouravailabilityforahearingintheCircuitCourt.
Thankyou.
YolandaI. Martinez
Paralegalto: DanielleN. Parsons
Ms. YolandaI. Martinez
Page2
December5, 2013
Aresponsefrom youwillassistmeindetermininghowtohandlethismatter.
Thankyouforyourcooperation.
Sincerely,
GhuniseL. Coaxum
BarCounsel
UPLDepartment,Orlando
GLC/ct
Enclosure
cc: NeilJ. Gillespie
Enclosure
'. .

THE FLORIDA BAR
QC:)

ee:.
5
1000 LEGION PLACE, SUITE 1625
- I --.....

.
. ORLANDO, FL 328011050
1 p ,1
..-

0003119581 DEC 05 2013
""':::"":'::::Ir.2II.Io:III..-::E MAILED FROMZIP CODE 32801
Visit our website: www.FLORIDABAR.org
8092 SW 115th Loop
::i448i355792
IJill j IJJIif J' f j"J iI JJ', JIJfJJJ,JI,',JjII JJ"1,1 JJ' Ij JjJJJIi JI jJ
'1 ............... it _--_........: :::.. : __._.. __..__............._.... IS"
TheFloridaBar
TheGatewayCenter
1000LegionPlace,Suite1625
JohnF. Harkness,Jr.
Orlando,Florida32801-1050
(407)425-0473
ExecutiveDirector www.FLORIDABAR.org
December5,2013
Mr. NeilJ. Gillespie
8092SW115thLoop
Ocala,FL34481
Re: UnlicensedPracticeofLawInvestigationofYolandaI. Martinez
CaseNo. 20143031(9A)
DearMr. Gillespie:
Thankyouforyourcomplaintregardingtheactivitiesof theabove-referencedindividual.
Wearereviewingtheactivitiesandif theyappeartoconstitutetheunlicensedpracticeoflaw,we
willreferthismattertotheappropriatecommitteeforinvestigation.
Thankyouagainforbringingthismattertotheattentionof TheFloridaBar.
Sincerely,
GhuniseL. Coaxum
BarCounsel
UPLDepartment,Orlando
GLC/ct

-

-:
r ..... .... I'll .1 en r 7 r T '.'.'1 ' .... ., I l. III'';rl'111111Inn m '1 ,". ,..rrflr"tlT" II r r I '!fIdi..J' .. ?tn. T

THE FLORIDABAR

o

1000LEGIONPLACE, SUITE 1625
- , -e-.....-.r..-r

ORLANDO, FL 32801-1050
PITNEY BOWES
i
.. 02 1 P $000.46

G :: 0003119581 DEC 05 2013
MAILED FROMZIP CODE 32801
Visitourwebsite:www.FLORIDABAR.org
8092 SW115thLoop
Ocala,FL34481
34481356792 ",,"",11
'1
I"'" 'II ," I, 111""11'h,I", II' J," "til" I""If
,_ ., .Mik ...._",, " . "-_.. .__ , ..1..;
TheFloridaBar
UnlicensedPracticeofLaw
ComplaintForm
Pleasecarefullyreviewthiscomplaintformonceyou haveincludedallinformation. Notethatthereisa
requirementforyou toexecutetheoathattheend ofthisform. Falsestatementsmadein badfaithor
with malicemaysubjectyou tocivil or criminal liability. Acopy ofyour complaint maybe senttothe
nonlawyerduringthecourse ofthe investigation. Additionally, ifthe nonlawyeraskswho complained,
your namewill be provided. Further information may be found in the pamphlet "Filingan Unlicensed
PracticeofLawComplaint."
YourName:NeilJ. Gillespie Nonlawyer'sName:Yolanda I. Martinez
Address: 8092SW115thLoop Address: 225E. RobinsonSt., Suite660
City: Ocala State:Florida City: Orlando State:Florida
ZipCode:_-;::34=4=8=1===:::::;-____
Telephone:(j352-854-78071
ZipCode:
Telephone:(
32801
>1407-674-1660 C
DESCRIBEYOUR COMPLAINT, PROVIDEDATESANDFACTS OFALLEGED MISCONDUCTANDATTACH ACOPYOF
RELEVANTDOCUMENTS. YOUR COMPLAINTANDDOCUMENTSWILLBESCANNED. PLEASE LIMITCOMPLAINT
ANDATTACHMENTSTO 25PAGES. (UseaseparatesheetIfnecessary. Donotwriteonthebackofthisforml)
Pleaseseetheaccompanyingseparate23pagecomplaint, and 1page Indextoexhibits, 25pagestotalwiththisform.
ThisUPLcomplaintexhaustedTheFlorida Bar's25pagelimit.Thus, the52 pagesofExhibitsshownonthe Index
areavailableon request, oronlineasshown on thecomplaint.
Underpenaltyofperjury,IdeclarethatIhaveread ntandthattothebestofmyknowledge
andbeliefthefactsstatedin itaretrue.
RETURN TO THE FLORIDABAR
UPLDepartment
TheFlorida Bar
Suite2580
4200GeorgeJ. Bean Pkwy.
Tampa,FL 33607-1496
UPLDepartment
The Florida Bar
TheGatewayCenter
Suite1625
1000Legion Place
Orlando,FL32801-1050
UPLDepartment
TheFlorida Bar
LakeShorePlazaII
Suite130
1300ConcordTerrace
Sunrise,FL 33323
UPLDepartment
TheFlorida Bar
RivergatePlaza
SuiteM-100
444BrickellAvenue
Miami,FL 33131
UPLDepartment
TheFlorida Bar
651E. JeffersonSt.
Tallahassee,FL 32399-2300
J ohn F. Harkness, Executive Director Ghunise Coaxum, UPL Bar Counsel
The Florida Bar Florida Bar Orlando Branch Office
651 East J efferson Street 1000 Legion Place, Suite 1625
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2300 Orlando, Florida 32801-1050
Email: jharkness@flabar.org Email: N/A
VIA U.P.S. No. 1Z64589F0392969709 VIA U.P.S. No. 1Z64589FP293587311
Lori Holcomb, UPL Counsel, Unlicensed Patricia M. Moring, Chair
Practice Of Law Standing Committee Fifth Circuit UPL Committee
The Florida Bar, 651 East J efferson Street Moring & Moring, P.A.
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2300 7655 W. Gulf To Lake Hwy. Suite 12
Email: lholcomb@flabar.org Crystal River, Florida 34429-7910
VIA U.P.S. No. 1Z64589FP294475323 Email: pmoring@moringlaw.com
VIA U.P.S. No. 1Z64589FP291806499
December 1, 2013
UPL complaint against Yolanda I. Martinez, a non-lawyer paralegal employed by
McCalla Raymer, LLC, 225 E. Robinson St., Suite 660, Orlando, FL 32801.
Ms. Martinez is a paralegal to attorney Danielle Nicole Parsons, FL Bar ID 29364.
Note: The Florida Bar is investigating me for UPL for representing my interests in his
matter, the wrongful foreclosure of my homestead on a HECM reverse mortgage.
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen of The Florida Bar:
Enclosed please find my signed UPL complaint and form for Yolanda I. Martinez, a non-lawyer
paralegal employed by McCalla Raymer LLC, for the Unlicensed Practice of Law (UPL).
Wet-ink signed documents were provided to Mr. Harkness. Copies were provided otherwise.
[Rule 2.515(c), Fla.R.J ud.Admin.].
Table of Contents
Section I. P. 2 Cases involved, foreclosure of a HECM reverse mortgage; SCOTUS
Section II. P. 3 Legal authority; UPL by a paralegal, federal offenses, judicial misconduct
Section III. P. 5 Professional paralegal background of Yolanda I. Martinez
Section IV. P. 6 Supervision of paralegal Martinez by attorney Danielle Nicole Parsons
Section V. P. 7 UPL of paralegal Yolanda I. Martinez in federal court
Section VI. P. 12 Fraud or impairment by Ms. Martinez/Ms. Parsons of federal case
Section VII. P. 13 Ex parte communication Ms. Martinez/Ms. Parsons, federal judicial officers
Section VIII. P. 14 UPL of paralegal Yolanda I. Martinez in state court
Section IX. P. 17 UPL investigation of Neil Gillespie for defending foreclosure of his home
Section X. P. 18 Mr. Rodems legal advice to Gillespie on foreclosure of reverse mortgage
Section XI. P. 20 Political persecution of Neil Gillespie by The Florida Bar et al.
Section XII. P. 21 U.S. Congressman Elijah E. Cummings letter to FHFA, McCalla Raymer
Section XIII. P. 22 McCalla Raymer LLC, criminal enterprise for Atty. Gen. investigation
Section XIV. P. 22 Disability of Neil J . Gillespie, exploitation by McCalla Raymer/RMS
UPL complaint against paralegal Yolanda I. Martinez December 1, 2013
Overview
Ms. Martinez is a paralegal to attorney Danielle Nicole Parsons, FL Bar ID 29364 who is also
employed by McCalla Raymer LLC. UPL of Ms. Martinez occurred while representing client
Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. in cases involving the disputed foreclosure of my homestead
on a Home Equity Conversion Mortgage
1
or HECM, a FHA
2
reverse mortgage program
administered by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. (HUD).
My name is Neil J . Gillespie, a law-abiding, indigent, 57 year-old disabled single man, a
surviving reverse mortgage borrower and homeowner reluctantly appearing pro se to save my
home in a 55+community in Ocala Florida from wrongful foreclosure.
Ghunise Coaxum, UPL Bar Counsel, opened a vexatious UPL investigation of me for defending
my interest in this foreclosure, on the complaint of attorney Ryan Christopher Rodems, a partner
in the firm Barker, Rodems & Cook who formerly represented me. The UPL investigation of me
by The Florida Bar is political persecution that also includes U.S. J udge William Terrell Hodges,
and Florida attorney Eugene P. Castagliuolo, in retaliation for my Petition No. 12-7747 to the
U.S. Supreme Court seeking, inter alia, better regulation of the legal profession.
U.S. Congressman Elijah E. Cummings complained to the FHFA, the Federal Housing Finance
Administration, about fraud and misconduct by foreclosure mills, most of whom are Florida law
firms. McCalla Raymer LLC is named in the Congressmans letter to the FHFA. Unfortunately
the Florida Attorney General is not protecting Floridians from lawyers operating as criminals.
Section I. Cases involved, foreclosure of a HECM reverse mortgage; SCOTUS
Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. v. Neil J . Gillespie, et al., Marion County Florida, Fifth
J udicial Circuit, No. 42-2013CA-000115-AXXX-XX, a.k.a. case no. 2013-CA-000115.
Presiding. Hon. Hale Ralph Stancil, Florida Circuit Court J udge, trial judge Marion Co.
Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. v. Neil J . Gillespie, et al., removed February 4, 2013 to U.S.
District Court, Ocala Division, Middle District Florida, No. 5:13-cv-00058-WTH-PRL
Presiding. U.S. J udge William Terrell Hodges, Senior Status, trial judge Ocala Division
Presiding U.S. Magistrate J udge Philip R. Lammens, magistrate judge Ocala Division
Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. v. Neil J . Gillespie, et al., U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Eleventh Circuit, No. 13-11585-B.
Neil J . Gillespie v. Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. et al. The Florida Bar is a cross-party for

1
12 U.S.C. 1715z20 - Insurance of home equity conversion mortgages for elderly
homeowners, and 24 C.F.R. Part 206, Home Equity Conversion Mortgage Insurance.
2
The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) is a United States government agency.
political persecution of me in retaliation for me seeking a First Amendment redress of grievances
in Petition No. 12-7747, and the case with Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. and Neil J . Gillespie
v. Thirteenth J udicial Circuit Florida et al, 5:11-cv-539-WTH-TBS in U.S. District Court, Ocala.
Petition No. 13-7280 alleges UPL by Ms. Martinez in the Table of Contents, and on page 34:
UPL by paralegal Yolanda I. Martinez, McCalla Raymer, Rule 10-2.1(a), Ethics Opinion
70-62, activity which requires the attorney's personal judgment and participation;
Florida Court, see emails Aug-07-2013 Gillespie-Martinez (Sep. Vol. App No. 2);
District Court, see Rule 11 sanction motion (Doc. 15); Rule 55 motion for default
judgment, (Doc. 16); Rule 72/Rule 60(b)(3) Verified Objection to Magistrate Order (Doc.
17); Affidavit 28 U.S.C. 144 (Doc. 22)
Section II. Legal authority; UPL by a paralegal, federal offenses, judicial misconduct
UPL by a nonlawyer paralegal is regulated by The Rules Regulating The Florida Bar,
Rules Governing Unlicensed Practice, and Ethics Opinion 70-62. (Exhibit 1)
Reference to Ethics Opinion 70-62 in a Florida Bar News article by Ghunise Coaxum,
Paralegals in a law office and the unlicensed practice of law.(UPL Update), February 15, 2004.
(Exhibit 2). I purchased the Florida Bar News article online from Amazon.com for $5.95.
(Exhibit 3). It is unclear whether this creates a conflict of interest for Mr. Coaxum and me.
Rule 102.1(b) of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar defines a paralegal as a person who
works under the supervision of a member of The Florida Bar and who performs specifically
delegated substantive legal work for which a member of The Florida Bar is responsible. Only
persons who meet the definition may call themselves paralegals.
Professional Ethics of The Florida Bar
Ethics Opinion 70-62, February 12, 1971
Lay personnel may be used in a law office only to the extent that they are
delegated mechanical, clerical or administrative duties. The attorney may not
ethically delegate to a lay employee any activity which requires the attorney's
personal judgment and participation.
Paralegals in a law office and the unlicensed practice of law.(UPL Update)
Attorneys rely on paralegals and other nonlawyer office staff to perform various
activities. Generally, the activity may constitute the unlicensed practice of law if
it is something that requires the attorney's independent judgment and
participation, and it is performed by the paralegal. See, The Florida Bar Ethics
Opinion, 70-62.
Fraud or Impairment of a legitimate government activity, 18 U.S.C. 371
The general conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. 371, creates an offense "[i]f two or more
persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the
United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose. (emphasis added).
See Project, Tenth Annual Survey of White Collar Crime, 32 Am. Crim. L. Rev. 137,
379-406 (1995)(generally discussing 371).
925 Obstructing or Impairing Legitimate Government Activity
1739 Offenses Related to Obstruction of J ustice Offenses
Deprivation of rights under color of law, 18 U.S.C. 242
DOJ Summary. Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color
of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the
Constitution or laws of the United States.
Conspiracy against rights, 18 U.S.C. 241.
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in
any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or
enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the
United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with
intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so
secured
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if
death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include
kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit
aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241
Letter May 28, 2013 from U.S. Senator Bill Nelson of Florida, and six pages of information on
making a complaint under the J udicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980, 28 U.S.C. 351-
364 ("Act"). (Exhibit 10). From page 13 of Petition No. 13-7280:
U.S. Senator Bill Nelson provided in his letter to me May 28, 2013 information on how
to make a complaint of judicial misconduct
3
. I believe the success rate is about zero for a
pro se litigant who makes a complaint of judicial misconduct, regardless of the
complaints merits.
Also, I am not familiar enough with the federal complaint process to make a judicial complaint. I
do not have time to stop and learn the process now. I am trying to save my home from wrongful
foreclosure. J udicial complaints, like Bar complaints, do not provide the complainant with any
useful relief. If time allows later, I may make a complaint then, if needed.
Section III. Professional paralegal background of Yolanda I. Martinez
It does not appear that Ms. Martinez is a Florida Registered Paralegal, Rule 20-2.1(b), and I
cannot locate a Florida Bar directory page for her.
Linked-In shows a listing for Yolanda Martinez of McCalla Raymer Orlando Florida. A print-out
of the Linked-In webpage appears at Exhibit 4. This is a brief summation of the information.
Yolanda Martinezs Overview
Current: Paralegal at McCalla Raymer
Past: Litigation Paralegal at Katzman Garfinkel & Berger
Paralegal at South, Millhausen
Legal Assistant at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Education: J uly 2009: Kaplan University
Kaplan University
Yolanda Martinezs Summary
Experienced Litigation Paralegal - with vast knowledge of civil litigation, trial preparation;
experience in Media Law, Federal Laws, Contract, Personal Injury, Medical Malpractice, ability
to draft pleadings; perform legal research; communicate well with clients; perform investigation
and ability to read, speak and write in Spanish

3
Filing a Complaint of Judicial Misconduct or Judicial Disability Against A Federal Judge. The
process is governed by the J udicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980, 28 U.S.C. 351-364
(Act), and Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings, 248 F.R.D. 674
(2008)
The signature block on email of Yolanda I. Martinez shows:
Paralegal to: Danielle N. Parsons |
MCCALLA RAYMER, LLC
225 E. Robinson St., Ste 660
Orlando, FL 32801
Direct Dial: (407) 674-1660
Danielle Parsons Direct Dial (407) 674-1657
Fax: (321) 248-0420
Email: yolanda.martinez@mccallaraymer.com
Designated Primary Email For Service
Pursuant to Fla. R. Jud. Admin 2.516
mrservice@mccallaraymer.com
Section IV Supervision of paralegal Martinez by attorney Danielle Nicole Parsons
A member of The Florida Bar is responsible for the work of a paralegal. This complaint of UPL
against Ms. Martinez shows misconduct for the responsible attorney, Danielle Nicole Parsons.
Rules Governing Unlicensed Practice, 10-2 Definitions
Rule 10-2.1. Generally
(b) Paralegal or Legal Assistant. A paralegal or legal assistant is a person qualified by
education, training, or work experience, who works under the supervision of a member of
The Florida Bar and who performs specifically delegated substantive legal work for
which a member of The Florida Bar is responsible. A nonlawyer or a group of
nonlawyers may not offer legal services directly to the public by employing a lawyer to
provide the lawyer supervision required under this rule. It shall constitute the unlicensed
practice of law for a person who does not meet the definition of paralegal or legal
assistant to use the title paralegal, legal assistant, or other similar term in offering to
provide or in providing services directly to the public.
Therefore I take that to mean a separate Bar complaint is required for Ms. Parsons. Florida Bar
directory listing information for Ms. Parsons.
Danielle Nicole Parsons, ID Number: 29364
225 E Robinson St. Ste 660
Orlando, Florida 32801-4321
Phone: 407.674.1850
Fax: 321.248.0420
E-Mail: mrservice@mccallaraymer.com
Section V UPL of paralegal Yolanda I. Martinez in federal court
Pleadings showing UPL, or related to Unlicensed Practice of Law, by Ms. Martinez:
Rule 11 Motion For Sanctions Danielle N. Parsons McCalla Raymer, LLC
Document 15, filed February 26, 2013
Rule 55 Motion For Default J udgment, Document 16, filed February 26, 2013
Rule 72/Rule 60 Verified Objection, Motion For Relief, Magistrate J udges Order (Doc.
12) Document 17, filed March 5, 2013
Affidavit of Neil J . Gillespie, 28 U.S.C. 144, Document 22, filed April 8, 2013.
My Rule 11 Motion shows Ms. Martinez engaged in UPL by email Thursday, February 21,
2013 2:52 PM as held in Ethics Opinion 70-62 when she engaged in activity which requires
the attorney's personal judgment and participation. [Ethics Opinion 70-62]
Specially, Ms. Martinez:
1. Conducted with me by email a conference pursuant to Local Rule 3.01(g), M.D. FL
2. During the Rule 3.01(g) conference, Ms. Martinez knowingly misrepresented to me by
email the legal date Plaintiffs response to my Motion to Dismiss was due:
The email of Ms. Martinez appears at Exhibit A to my Rule 11 Motion For Sanctions.
(Doc. 15). The email of Ms. Martinez accompanies this UPL complaint as Exhibit 5.
Local Rule 3.01(g):
(g) Before filing any motion in a civil case, except a motion for injunctive relief, for
judgment on the pleadings, for summary judgment, to dismiss or to permit maintenance
of a class action, to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted,
or to involuntarily dismiss an action, the moving party shall confer with counsel for the
opposing party in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised by the motion, and shall
file with the motion a statement (1) certifying that the moving counsel has conferred with
opposing counsel and (2) stating whether counsel agree on the resolution of the motion.
A certification to the effect that opposing counsel was unavailable for a conference
before filing a motion is insufficient to satisfy the parties obligation to confer. The
moving party retains the duty to contact opposing counsel expeditiously after filing and
to supplement the motion promptly with a statement certifying whether or to what extent
the parties have resolved the issue(s) presented in the motion. If the interested parties
agree to all or part of the relief sought in any motion, the caption of the motion shall
include the word unopposed, agreed, or stipulated or otherwise succinctly inform
the reader that, as to all or part of the requested relief, no opposition exists.
Ms. Martinez engaged in UPL because a Rule 3.01(g) conference is activity which requires the
attorney's personal judgment and participation. Furthermore, Rule 3.01(g) does not provide for
a conference with an unrepresented nonlawyer party. I am not a lawyer, and am not subject to the
plain language of the local rule, which specifies opposing counsel or counsel.
Plaintiffs counsel Ms. Parsons did not respond to any of my Rule 3.01(g) attempts to confer, and
I noted her failure in the three pleadings above.
Ms. Martinez further engaged in UPL by purporting to determine a legal deadline to respond to
my motion to dismiss under Federal Court Rules; Ms. Martinez knew the information she
provided was wrong, and provided with a corrupt purpose. Notwithstanding the knowing
falsehood with malice aforethought about the deadline, she waited until 1 hour and 8 minutes
before the Court closed at 4:00 PM. This is not a good faith effort under Rule 301(g).
My Rule 55 Motion For Default J udgment, Document 16, filed February 26, 2013, shows:
1. Rule 55(a), F.R.C.P., Entering a Default. When a party against whom a judgment for
affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend, and that failure is
shown by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk must enter the party's default. In this case the
Plaintiff failed to respond within 14 days (Rule 12(a)(4)) to Gillespies motion to dismiss
filed February 4, 2013. The time for default was February 19, 2013
4
. The Plaintiff has
defaulted and Gillespie is entitled to a Default J udgment.
2. Gillespie filed contemporaneously with this motion a Rule 11 Motion for Sanctions
against Plaintiffs Counsel Danielle N. Parsons and the law firm McCalla Raymer, LLC.
The motion shows that Ms. Parsons mislead the Court and Gillespie in her Agreed
Motion For Extension of Time (Doc. 11). Ms. Parsons and her staff also misled
Gillespie regarding the good-faith conference pursuant to Middle District Local Rule
3.01(g). Gillespie respectfully incorporates his Rule 11 Motion for Sanctions into this
Rule 55 Motion for Default J udgment.
3. In reliance upon Ms. Parsons misrepresentations, this Court entered an Order (Doc.
12). Unfortunately, due to Ms. Parsons misrepresentations to the Court in her Agreed
Motion For Extension of Time (Doc. 11), the Order should rescind the Order. (Doc. 12).
My Rule 72/Rule 60 Verified Objection, Motion For Relief, Magistrate J udges Order (Doc.
12) Document 17, filed March 5, 2013.
Appearing pro se, Defendants, NEIL J . GILLESPIE, and NEIL J . GILLESPIE CO-

4
TRUSTEE, (herein after Gillespie) hereby make a verified objection under Fed. R. Civ.
P. 72 to the Magistrate J udges Order (Doc. 12) entered February 22, 2013. In addition to
and in the alternative to the relief sought above, Gillespie moves under Fed. R. Civ. P.
60(b)(3) for relief from the Magistrate J udges Order (Doc. 12) entered February 22,
2013, and states:
1. Magistrate J udge Philip R. Lammens entered an Order (Doc. 12) February 22, 2013
granting the Plaintiff relief based on Ms. Parsons Agreed Motion For Extension of
Time filed the previous day February 21, 2013 (Doc. 11). Unfortunately Ms. Parsons
motion was a fraud on the Court wherein she made false statements and material
misrepresentations, and engaged in misconduct, set forth in Gillespies Rule 11 Motion
For Sanctions Against Danielle N. Parsons and McCalla Raymer, LLC (Doc. 15).
Gillespies Rule 11 motion shows Ms. Parsons missed a deadline to file a response to
Gillespies Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 5), and engaged in fraud, misrepresentation and
misconduct to secure an extension to file a response, when in fact the Plaintiff defaulted
and Gillespie was entitled to a Default J udgment. (Doc. 16). Gillespie moved for Default
J udgment February 26, 2013. (Doc. 16).
2. Ms. Parsons made a number of false statements and material misrepresentations to the
Court in her motion (Doc. 11) intended to mislead the Court and federal judge(s) for the
purpose of advantage to: A. Cover-up Counsels incompetence and lack of diligence for
not timely filing a response to the motion to dismiss, a response due February 19, 2013.
(Rule 12(a)(4)); and B. Trick Gillespie into believing Plaintiffs response was due J anuary
21, 2013, when otherwise he could move for Default J udgment. (Rule 55). (Doc. 15, 8).
3. Gillespie respectfully incorporates into this pleading the following related pleadings he
previously submitted to the Court, including:
Rule 11 Motion For Sanctions Against Danielle N. Parsons And McCalla
Raymer, LLC (Doc. 15), filed February 26, 2013
Rule 55 Motion For Default J udgment (Doc. 16), filed February 26, 2013
Objections To Magistrate J udge Philip R. Lammens Report and
Recommendation, filed March 4, 2013.
4. Ms. Parsons made several material representations to the Court in her Certification
Pursuant To Middle District Local Rule 3.01(g) (Doc. 11) that stated:
Counsel for Plaintiff hereby advises this Honorable Court that it has attempted in
good faith to confer with pro se Defendant, Neil Gillespie via electronic mail as
this is the only form of communication we have. Counsel sent an email to Mr.
Gillespie advising him that we were in need of an extension. Defendant, Neil
Gillespie, has agreed to the within request for an extension of time.
First, Counsel did not contact Gillespie at any time to confer in good faith as required
by Local Rule 3.01(g). Ms. Parsons misled the Court when she wrote electronic mail is
the only form of communication we have. Gillespies home telephone number is
provided on all his pleadings, on his Florida Rule 2.516 notice in state court, and is listed
on the Courts civil docket along with his home address. Ms. Parsons further lied to the
Court when she wrote Counsel sent an email to Mr. Gillespie advising him that we were
in need of an extension. Ms. Parsons did not send Gillespie an email advising that she
was in need of an extension. Instead, Yolanda I. Martinez, paralegal to Ms. Parsons,
contacted Gillespie by email February 21, 2013 at 2.52 PM for the purpose of misleading
Gillespie about the extension: (Doc. 15., 9). (Exhibit A).
Unfortunately Ms. Martinez misrepresented to Gillespie in her email that Our
response to your Motion to Dismiss is due today per the Federal Court Rules...
The statement of Ms. Martinez is false. The Plaintiffs response was due two days
earlier, February 19, 2013. The false statement made in connection with the Local
Rule 3.01(g) was not made in good faith as required, and denied Gillespie
informed consent in which to respond.
of 47 PageID 86
a response was due to the Motion to Dismiss on J anuary 19, 2013
5
, a date certain and no
other date. Accordingly the Plaintiff is in default and Gillespie is entitled to a Default
J udgment.
7. Gillespie agreed to extend the time for Ms. Parsons to file a response, but that was
based on a false statement by Plaintiffs Counsel [through paralegal Ms. Martinez].

5
Gillespie did not agree to Counsel making false statements or representations during the
good-faith conference required by Local Rule 3.01(g), and/or filing a false record of
events with the Court, which appears calculated to:
A. Cover-up Counsels incompetence and lack of diligence for not timely filing a
response to the motion to dismiss, a response due February 19, 2013. (Rule
12(a)(4))
B. Trick Gillespie into believing Plaintiffs response was due J anuary 21, 2013,
when otherwise he could move for Default J udgment. (Rule 55).
prejudiced by the granting of this extension of time. (Doc. 11, 5). Ms. Parsons
statement is false. Gillespie is prejudiced because he is entitled to a Default J udgment.
Gillespie moved for Default J udgment February 26, 2013. (Doc. 16).
14. Gillespie requested in his Notice of Removal (Doc. 1, p 4, 16) that any rulings made
by a U.S. Magistrate J udge be in conformity with the Report and Recommendation
format. The subject Order (Doc. 12) was not made in a Report and Recommendation
format.
My Affidavit of Neil J . Gillespie, 28 U.S.C. 144, Document 22, filed April 8, 2013, shows:
13. U.S. Congressman Elijah E. Cummings wrote February 25, 2011 to Inspector General
Linick of Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) asking that he initiate an
investigation into widespread allegations of abuse by private attorneys and law firms
hired to process foreclosures as part of the "Retained Attorney Network" established by
Fannie Mae.
14. The Plaintiff in this case is represented by McCalla Raymer, LLC. The letter of Rep.
Cummings complains about McCalla Raymer, LLC by name:
defendant in a federal lawsuit in which the plaintiffs allege that it engaged in
fraud, racketeering, and the manufacture of fraudulent foreclosure documents.
Reportedly, this firm established operations in Florida under the name Stone,
McGehee & Silver and hired ten former Stern law firm employees. The firm
Stone, McGehee and Silver, LLC, dba McCalla Raymer currently appears as a
"Designated Counsel/Trustee" in Florida for Freddie Mac.
15. Unfortunately McCalla Raymer, LLC is now doing business in Florida under its own
name in Orlando Florida. I have personal knowledge of this firms misconduct in this case.
16. On February 26, 2013 I filed a Rule 11 Motion For Sanctions Against Danielle N.
Parsons And McCalle Raymer, LLC (Doc 15). The Court has not ruled on my motion.
17. On February 26, 2013 I filed a Rule 55 Motion For Default J udgment (Doc. 16.)
The Court has not ruled on my motion.
18. On March 5, 2013 I filed a Verified Objection To, And Motion For Relief From, A
Magistrate J udges Order (Doc. 12) under Fed. R. Civ. P 72, and Rule 60(b)(3). The
Court has not ruled on my motion.
25. [relevant portion only] [Note: Ms. Parsons of McCalla Raymer, LLC filed a
fraudulent civil cover sheet in the state court foreclosure of the subject mortgage.]
25. (number 25 repeated by mistake in the pleading)Unfortunately, I do not believe I can
get a fair hearing in any Florida state or federal court due to the corrupting power and
influence of The Florida Bar set forth in Petition 12-7747.
Section VI Fraud or impairment by Ms. Martinez/Ms. Parsons of the federal case
Evidence shows Yolanda I. Martinez, Danielle N. Parsons, and McCalla Raymer, LLC, engaged
in fraud or impairment of case 5:13-cv-00058-WTH-PRL
My Rule 11 Motion shows Ms. Martinez emailed me Thursday, February 21, 2013 at 2:52.
Ms. Martinez knowingly misrepresented to me by email the legal date Plaintiffs response to my
Motion to Dismiss was due:
The email of Ms. Martinez appears at Exhibit A to my Rule 11 Motion For Sanctions. (Doc. 15).
The email of Ms. Martinez accompanies this UPL complaint as Exhibit 5.
of 47 PageID 86
a response was due to the Motion to Dismiss on J anuary 19, 2013[fn2], a date certain and
no other date. Accordingly the Plaintiff is in default and Gillespie is entitled to a Default
J udgment. [fn2] The Court was closed Monday February 18, 2013 for Presidents Day,
the actual due date.
prejudiced by the granting of this extension of time. Ms. Parsons statement is false.
Gillespie is prejudiced because he is entitled to a Default J udgment....
My Rule 55 Motion For Default J udgment, Document 16, filed February 26, 2013, shows the
Plaintiff defaulted and I am entitled to a Default J udgment.
Section VII Ex parte communication Ms. Martinez/Ms. Parsons, federal judicial officers
Evidence shows Ms. Martinez and Ms. Parsons, thru McCalla Raymers email service, engaged
in ex parte communication with U.S. J udge Hodges and U.S. Magistrate J udge Lammens.
The Order (Doc. 12) entered February 22, 2013 by U.S. Magistrate J udge Lammens arrived by
U.S. Mail first class to me with additional papers that show email communication between the
Court and Yolanda I. Martinez at yim@mccallaraymer.com. This is unusual because the Court
did not communicate by email with Tiffany Caparas of Kaufman, Englett & Lynd, PLLC,
counsel of record for Mark Gillespie et al. [compare, yolanda.martinez@mccallaraymer.com]
Tellingly the Court did not use MaCalla Raymers designated primary email for service pursuant
to Fla. R. J ud. Admin 2.516, mrservice@mccallaraymer.com (see Exhibit 14, McGough email)
The Court shows this information on a paper sent to me. (Exhibit 6).
The signature block of Ms. Martinezs email shows yolanda.martinez@mccallaraymer.com, but
yim@mccallaraymer.com appears in the caption section of email of Ms. Martinez.
Tellingly the Court did not send email to Tiffany Caparas of Kaufman, Englett & Lynd, PLLC,
counsel of record. Instead Ms. Caparas was provided notice delivered by other means. I got the
notice [the Order Doc. 12] delivered by other means, by US Mail first class. (Exhibit 6).
Tellingly Magistrate Lammens entered the Order (Doc. 12) on Plaintiffs motion the next day.
The Order (Doc. 12) was entered February 22, 2013 but was not mailed to me until February 25,
2013 according to the Courts postage meter imprint. Unfortunately the U.S. District Court for
the Middle District of Florida has a discriminatory pro se policy that prohibits e-filing and access
to the Courts CM/ECF system for pro se litigants, consumers of legal and court services
affecting interstate commerce. My motion has been pending since February 6, 2013 for
authorization to file electronically (Doc. 7), so that I may access legal and court services in this
action in an effective and expeditious manner, as provided by the Constitution and laws of the
United States, and Constitution and laws of the state of Florida.
I requested in my Notice of Removal (Doc. 1, p 4, 16) that any rulings made by a U.S.
Magistrate J udge be in conformity with the Report and Recommendation format. The subject
Order (Doc. 12) was not made in conformity the Report and Recommendation format.
The above email scenario was repeated in the following decisions by the Court:
Order Remanding Case (Doc. 19) by US J udge Hodges, March 7, 2013:
J udgment in a Civil Case (Doc. 20) by Clerk Sheryl L Loesch March 11, 2013,
Order (Doc. 24) by US J udge Hodges, April 12, 2013 (denied inter alia my affidavit 28 USC 144)
Section VIII UPL of paralegal Yolanda I. Martinez in state court
Yolanda I. Martinez engaged in UPL by email on Wednesday, August 07, 2013 when she
Opinion 70-62]. Specifically Ms. Martinez provided me legal advice on the meaning of an Order
entered J uly 25, 2013 by the U.S. Eleventh Circuit in Appeal Number: 13-11585-B.
Ms. Martinezs UPL began with her email to me August 07, 2013 1:44 PM: (Exhibit 7).
Case No.: 2013-CA-000115
Mr. Gillespie:
We would like to set a hearing on your Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint before
the Honorable Hale R. Stancil. In that regard I have contacted the J udge's J udicial
Assistant and she has provided me with the following available dates and times for
the hearing:
Tuesday, September 3, 2013 between the hours of 1-5
Friday, September 6, 2013 between the hours of 1-5
We would like to secure a 15 minute hearing time during those hours. Kindly let me
know which date and time works best for you so that I can contact the judge and
secure our hearing time.
Thank you.
I responded to Ms. Martinez by email August 07, 2013 4:07 PM. (Exhibit 8).
Dear Ms. Martinez:
Appeals rules on my petition for mandamus relief. Attached is my letter to the court,
served yesterday to Ms. Parsons at mrservice@mccallaraymer.com Thank you.
Sincerely,
Neil J . Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
(352) 854-7807.
I provided my responsive email to Ms. Martinez, and to the following persons by email,
including the trial judge, the Hon. Hale Ralph Stancil:
Ms. Martinez responded to me by email August 07, 2013 4:18 PM. (Exhibit 9).
Mr. Gillespie:
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has rendered its decision and has denied your Motion
for Reconsideration as you can see from the attached Order. In that regard, kindly advise
as to your availability for a hearing in the Circuit court.
Thank you.
The legal interpretation of the Order Ms. Martinez provided me by email was UPL because she
Opinion 70-62]. In addition Ms. Martinez provided false and misleading information about the
Order entered J uly 25, 2013 by the U.S. Eleventh Circuit in Appeal Number: 13-11585-B.
I responded to Ms. Martinez by email August 07, 2013 4:50 PM: (Exhibit 10).
Dear Ms. Martinez:
Appeals rules on my petition for mandamus relief.
Unfortunately you are not reading the order properly. Kindly consult with an attorney at
your firm. The decision entered allows a separate petition for mandamus relief. The U.S.
Eleventh Circuit entered a favorable Order J uly 25, 2013 that states in relevant part:
"Should Gillespie wish to petition for mandamus relief, he may file a separate petition for
a writ of mandamus or prohibition with this Court. See 28 U.S.C. 1651;
Fed.R.App.P.21".
This was the only option the court had, which is why it denied the motion to reconsider a
remand for lack of jurisdiction, but offered mandamus relief. Corporate Mgmt. Advisors,
Inc. 561 F.3d 1294, 1296 (11th Cir. 2009) held the failure to allege facts sufficient to
establish subject matter jurisdiction in a notice of removal is a defect in the removal
procedure, and consequently, the district court cannot sua sponte remand a case to state
court on that ground.
A writ of mandamus is the proper means by which a party may challenge a remand order.
Thermtron Products, Inc. v. Hermansdorfer, 423 U.S. 336, 352-53, 96 S.Ct. 584, 593-94,
46 L.Ed.2d 542 (1976). A remand order based on subject matter jurisdiction is not
reviewable by appeal. 28 U.S.C. 1447(d). But such remand order entered sua sponte is
a defect in the removal process within the meaning of 1447(c), and may be challenged
by writ of mandamus. New v. Sports & Recreation, Inc., 114 F.3d 1092, 1095-96 (11th
Cir. 1997).
In the past you and Ms. Parsons disrupted the tribunal in federal district court, and I hope
that does not happen again. Your misconduct is shown in the following pleadings in US
District Court, Middle District, Florida, Ocala Division, 5:13-cv-58-oc-WTH-PRL
Rule 11 sanction motion, Ms. Parsons, McCalla Raymer (Doc. 15)
Gillespie default motion, Rule 55 (Doc. 16)
Gillespie Verified Objection to Magistrate Order Doc. 12 (Doc. 17)
Unfortunately you and Ms. Parsons appear to have engaged in misconduct with the either
US J udge Hodges or Magistrate J udge Lammens. I alerted federal authorities. Attached
you will find a letter from U.S. Senator Bill Nelson instructing me on how to make a
formal complaint under the J udicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980, 28 U.S.C.
351-364.
So, I object to any hearings in state court until the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals
rules on my petition for mandamus relief, which is allowed in the order you attached.
However you, Ms. Parsons and foreclosure mill McCalla Raymer are free to do whatever
you like, subject to law.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Neil J . Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
(352) 854-7807.
I did not hear back from Ms. Martinez or Ms. Parsons. No hearing was set in state court. The
email was sent to the following persons, including J udge Stancil:
The email included attachments, a one-page letter May 28, 2013 from U.S. Senator Bill Nelson
of Florida, and six pages of information on making a complaint under the J udicial Conduct and
Disability Act of 1980, 28 U.S.C. 351-364 ("Act").
After the Eleventh Circuit Order was entered J uly 25, 2013, the Clerk provided instructions on
making a petition for writ of certiorari in forma pauperis to the U.S. Supreme Court, which was
filed October 23, 2013 as Petition No. 13-7280. Ultimately I chose that option over the C.A.11.
Section IX UPL investigation of Neil Gillespie for defending foreclosure of his home
The Florida Bar is wrongly investigating me for UPL for representing my interests in this
foreclosure, initiated on a complaint by Ryan Christopher Rodems. See the Unlicensed Practice
of Law Investigation of Neil J . Gillespie, Case No. 20133090(5), provided to me May 14, 2013
by letter of Ghunise Coaxum, UPL Bar Counsel. (Doc. 29, case 5:13-cv-00058-WTH-PRL).
Ryan Christopher Rodems is a partner in Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A., and former counsel for
Neil J . Gillespie in the same or substantially similar matter as the prior representation, and a
number of other matters, contrary to McPartland v. ISI Inv. Services, Inc., etc., and Bar Rules:
Florida Bar Rule 4-1.7 Conflict of Interest; Current Clients.
Florida Bar Rule 4-1.9 Conflict of Interest; Former Client.
Florida Bar Rule 4-1.10 Imputation of Conflicts of Interest.
Neil J . Gillespie v. Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. et al. The Florida Bar is a cross-party.
U.S. Supreme Court review is discretionary, and less than 100 of the approximately 10,000
petitions filed are granted certiorari per Term. Denial is not a judgment on the merits of a case.
As set forth in Petition No. 13-7280, page 34: (Exhibit 13)
Mr. Rodems UPL complaint against me appears in this petition at Appendix L and alleges:
Neil J . Gillespie is not a lawyer. He has...represented a Trust in state and federal court
litigation, and as a personal representative of the Estate of Penelope Gillespie...
I am not a lawyer. I appear pro se because I am indigent and financially unable to obtain counsel.
I deny Mr. Rodems allegation that I represented a Trust in state and federal court litigation,
and as a personal representative of the Estate of Penelope Gillespie... I represent only my
personal interest for myself, and my personal interest as co-trustee, as permitted by law:
First Amendment right to petition the Governmental for a redress of grievances.
28 U.S.C. 1654 - Appearance personally or by counsel.
Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 17 capacity (a) real interest (1) own name (E) trustee of express trust
Fla Const, Art I, Sec 21: Access to courts. The courts shall be open to every person for
redress of any injury, and justice shall be administered without sale, denial or delay.
Florida Statutes, 454.18, any person, whether an attorney or not . . . may conduct
his or her own cause in any court of this state.
Fla. Prob. Rule 5.030(a) Exception, see Lituchy v. Estate of Lituchy. I appear for my
own interest in the Estate. No one was appointed personal representative of the
Estate by Court Order. The last will and testament of my Mother names Mark
Gillespie personal representative and me as substitute personal representative.
Mark Gillespie, et al, represented in foreclosure by Tiffany Caparas Esq., Kaufman,
Englett and Lynd, PLLC; Notice of Consent to J udgment filed in 42-2013CA-000115
because they have no interest in the property. I only represent my interest in the trust.
Pro se litigants are held to a less stringent standard, see Tannenbaum v. United States.
The Courts failed to make a counsel appoint for me on basis of mental, physical and
speech disability. I plan to make a new motion for counsel appointment ASAP.
Order of J udge Cook attached to Rodems UPL complaint is a sham. see U.S. v Terry
The ICCPR provides me additional rights to represent my own interest in a fair court.
I was a client of FLSMF and got legal advice on the foreclosure, no advice of UPL.
CLSMF - correction
The Notice of Defendants Consent to J udgment filed in 42-2013CA-000115 by Kaufman,
Englett and Lynd, PLLC for Mark Gillespie, et al. appears at Exhibit 12.
Section X Mr. Rodems legal advice to Gillespie on foreclosure of reverse mortgage
Mr. Rodems provided me legal advice about this HECM reverse mortgage on J une 21, 2011
during his deposition of me in Gillespie v Barker Rodems & Cook, case 05-CA-7205, while I
was held coercive custody at the Hillsborough Courthouse.
On J une 1, 2011 Mr. Rodems corruptly got a civil bodily attachment arrest order issued to
depose me after case 05-CA-7205 closed and was on appeal in 2D10-5197. It was part of a
RICO racketeering scheme to force a coercive confinement settlement of my federal claims in
5:10-cv-503, Gillespie v. Thirteenth J udicial Circuit Florida et al, U.S.D.C. M.D.Fla. Ocala Div.,
as described in my Motion to Reconsider, Vacate or Modify Order in Appeal No. 12-11028-B in
the U.S. Eleventh Circuit found on PACER and posted on Scribed (3,157 views as of today):
http://www.scribd.com/doc/95369974/Motion-to-Reconsider-RICO-C-A-11-12-11028-B
Prior to providing me legal advice, Mr. Rodems read the all the mortgage documents, and did not
advise me of UPL if I represented myself. Rodems also read The Gillespie Family Living Trust
Agreement Dated February 10, 1997. Note: Mr. Rodems has lied so much about the Trust, that I
made it public as filed with my affidavit of indigency in case 5:11-cv-00539 (Doc 3) on PACER:
Case 5:11-cv-00539-WTH-TBS Document 3 Filed 09/20/11 Page 1 of 37 PageID 76
Here are sections from the transcript of the deposition where Mr. Rodems voluntarily provided
me legal advice but failed to inform me that appearing pro se to defend the foreclosure would
subject me to an investigation for UPL by The Florida Bar. (made on his UPL complaint).
Page 107
16 [ Mr . Rodems] Q Okay. Let ' s go t hr ough t he i t ems t hat I
17 have r equest ed i n t he deposi t i on. The f i r st i t em
18 was t he t r ust and al l amendment s, modi f i cat i ons or
19 changes. You' ve pr ovi ded me wi t h a document whi ch
20 i s Exhi bi t 4. I s i t your t est i mony t hat t hi s i s a
21 copy of t he t r ust dat ed Febr uar y 10t h, 1997 and al l
22 amendment s or modi f i cat i ons or changes?
23 [ Mr . Gi l l espi e] A Let me t ake a qui ck l ook at i t .
24 [ Mr . Rodems] Q Yes, si r .
25 [ Mr . Gi l l espi e] A Yes, uh- huh.
Page 112
9 [ Mr . Rodems] Q Okay. I f I r ead t hi s cor r ect l y, Mr .
10 Gi l l espi e, t he bor r ower f or t hi s r ever se mor t gage
11 was Penel ope M. Gi l l espi e, Nei l J . Gi l l espi e, and
12 Mar k Gi l l espi e as co- t r ust ees of t he Gi l l espi e
13 Fami l y Li vi ng Tr ust , an agr eement dat ed Febr uar y 10,
14 1997. Cor r ect ?
15 [ Mr . Gi l l espi e] A That ' s one way t o r ead i t . Bank of
16 Amer i ca doesn' t agr ee wi t h t hat .
17 [ Mr . Rodems] Q And I ' l l r ead t he accel er at i on cl ause
18 about when t he debt becomes due. " The Lender may
19 r equi r e i mmedi at e payment i n f ul l of al l sums
20 secur ed by t he secur i t y i nt er est i f a bor r ower di es
21 and t he pr oper t y i s not t he pr i nci pal r esi dence of
22 at l east one sur vi vi ng bor r ower . "
Page 113
8 BY MR. RODEMS:
9 Q Wel l , I guess t hat ' s an i ssue bet ween
10 Bank of Amer i ca and al l of you f ol ks, but i t sur e
11 does appear t o me t hat you' r e a bor r ower and you' r e
12 st i l l l i vi ng t her e, and t her e i s no accel er at i on of
13 t he debt . I s t hat your under st andi ng, Mr .
14 Gi l l espi e?
15 A That ' s what I ' ve been t ol d.
Section XI Political persecution of Neil Gillespie by The Florida Bar et al.
On October 25, 2013 I made an urgent appeal to the United Nations for protection from political
persecution. I am being persecuted by The Florida Bar, U.S. J udge William Terrell Hodges, and
Florida attorneys Ryan Christopher Rodems and Eugene P. Castagliuolo, in retaliation for
petitioning for a redress of grievances in Petition No. 12-7747 for writ of certiorari to the U.S.
Supreme Court. http://www.scribd.com/doc/179178461/
Unfortunately Petition No. 12-7747 was compromised by fraud of the Respondents. Specific
examples of current and ongoing political persecution of me include:
1. The Florida Bar for an open investigation of me for Unlicensed Practice of Law (UPL).
2. Mr. Rodems made the UPL complaint against me for representing myself and my interests.
3. J udge Hodges corruptly assisted McCalla Raymer in a wrongfully foreclosure of my home.
4. Mr. Castagliuolo ongoing threats to interfere with my Social Security disability income.
Petition No. 12-7747 was denied February 19, 2013. Rehearing was denied April 15, 2013.
Affidavit of Neil J . Gillespie: Fraud or Impairment of Petition No. 12-7747
http://www.scribd.com/doc/178751175/
In May 2013 Diana R. Esposito, Florida Chief-Assistant Attorney General, provided me
incriminating public records showing Respondent David A. Rowland, General Counsel for
Respondent Thirteenth J udicial Circuit Florida, concocted with others a fraud to falsely portray
to Kenneth Wilson, Florida Assistant Attorney General, that I did not serve Mr. Rowland my
petition as I certified under Supreme Court Rule 29. Mr. Wilson claims he relied on Rowlands
fraud, and did not submit a brief in opposition due the Supreme Court J anuary 14, 2013.
Without a response, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi denied me due process under the Fifth
and Fourteenth Amendments. The U.S. Supreme Court relies on opposition briefs as part of its
adversarial process to properly litigate and decide a petition. Floridas opposition brief was due
J anuary 14, 2013. AG Bondi did not respond for Florida, thus no opposition brief was distributed
for the Supreme Courts Conference February 15, 2013.
Persecution of me by U.S. J udge William Terrell Hodges
J udge Hodges made unlawful rulings to benefit the Plaintiff in a foreclosure action on my home.
Yolanda Martinez, a paralegal to Plaintiffs counsel Danielle Parsons of McCalla Raymer, LLC,
engaged in the Unlicensed Practice of Law in furtherance of a scheme to take my home by fraud,
see my Rule 11 sanction motion (Doc. 15), my Rule 55 default motion (Doc. 16), and my
verified objection to magistrate order Doc. 12 (Doc. 17) in case 5:13-cv-58-oc-WTH-PRL.
J udge Hodges is a shareholder in Bank of America, the real party Plaintiff, but failed to recuse as
required by 28 U.S.C. 455(b)(4) for his financial interest Bank of America. J udge Hodges then
ignored my 48 page affidavit for bias or prejudice, 28 U.S.C. 144, filed April 8, 2013 (Doc 22).
Tellingly J udge Hodges entered an order (Doc. 24) that wrongly denied under 144 his own
disqualification, and thus wrongly denied my Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend judgment.
J udge Hodges will not acknowledge certain federal laws of the United States, specifically the
DoddFrank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (12 U.S.C. Chapter 53), or the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB, 12 U.S.C. Chapter 53, Subchapter V) in orders
responsive to my pleadings in a contested HECM reverse mortgage foreclosure by Reverse
Mortgage Solutions, Inc. for Bank of America, the real party Plaintiff.
On March 15, 2013 I wrote to U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts about J udge
Hodges misconduct. Sen. Warren helped create and pass the DoddFrank Wall Street Reform
and Consumer Protection Act and the CFPB. J udge Hodges wrongly remanded the foreclosure
back to state court, which I appealed. U.S. Eleventh Circuit, Appeal No. 13-11585-B.
Section XII U.S. Congressman Elijah E. Cummings letter to FHFA; McCalla Raymer
U.S. Congressman Elijah E. Cummings wrote February 25, 2011 to Inspector General Steve A.
Linick of Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) asking that he initiate an investigation into
widespread allegations of abuse by private attorneys and law firms hired to process foreclosures
as part of the "Retained Attorney Network" established by Fannie Mae. Homeowners will get
abused by attorneys, paralegals and foreclosure mills like I got abused by McCalla Raymer LLC
while defending my HECM foreclosure. Rep. Cummings cited McCalla Raymer, LLC by name:
defendant in a federal lawsuit in which the plaintiffs allege that it engaged in fraud,
racketeering, and the manufacture of fraudulent foreclosure documents. Reportedly, this
firm established operations in Florida under the name Stone, McGehee & Silver and
hired ten former Stern law firm employees. The firm Stone, McGehee and Silver, LLC,
dba McCalla Raymer currently appears as a "Designated Counsel/Trustee" in Florida for
Freddie Mac.
U.S. Congressman Cummings six-page letter appears at Exhibit 11.
McCalla Raymer, LLC was also sued in the following federal lawsuits of which I am aware:
Muradas et al v. M&T Bank, RMS, 0.13-cv-60178-RSR
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida
Caceres v. McCalla Raymer, LLC, 1.13-cv-20035
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida
J enkins et al v. McCalla Raymer, LLC et al, 1:10-cv-03732-CAP
U.S. District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division
Marcia Moore v McCalla Raymer, LLC, 1:12-CV-1714-TWT
Thompson-El v. Bank of America, et al, case no. 1:12-CV-840-TWT
This list is not exhaustive, and I do not know the current status of these lawsuits. In the state
court action I alleged wrongdoing by Ms. Parsons (Doc. 5, 17-20) and perjury by Debbie
Sims, RMS vice president in her verification, see motion to dismiss (Doc. 5, 157-158).
Section XIII McCalla Raymer LLC, criminal enterprise for Atty. Gen. investigation
On information and belief, McCalla Raymer LLC operates as criminal enterprise and this is an
appropriate matter for the Attorney General of Florida to investigate and prosecute.
Section XIV Disability of Neil J. Gillespie, exploitation by McCalla Raymer/RMS
I am a disabled adult as defined by the following:
The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. 701 et. seq.
Section 825.101(4), Florida Statutes, Abuse and Exploitation of Disabled Adults
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.
ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA)
Paralegal Yolanda I. Martinez and attorney Danielle N. Parsons know I am disabled from my
filings in this matter, and engaged in Exploitation of a Disabled Adult as defined by Chapter 825,
Fla. Stat. as shown in this UPL complaint, and cases related to foreclosure of my homestead.
My Rule 11 Motion For Sanctions against Danielle N. Parsons McCalla Raymer, LLC,
Document 15, filed February 26, 2013, shows at 2:
2. Gillespie informed the Court that he is reluctantly appearing pro se to defend his home,
McCalla Raymer LLC, Orlando Florida
Page - 23
but he is not a lawyer and did not go to law school. (Doc. 1, p. 4, ~ 15; Doc. 7, p. 1, ~ 2).
Gillespie is also disabled [fnl]. (Doc. 7, p. 6-7, ~ 16). Gillespie's ability to perform the
kinds of tasks need in this lawsuit, such as reading and handling documents, is declining.
Gillespie's concentration and short term memory has declined, and he becomes confused.
(Doc. 7, p. 7). Gillespie's confusion is most problen1atic in real-time situations. Given
enough tin1e, he can usually figure things out, but not in a timely manner; it may take
weeks, months or years. [fnl] Gillespie's disability is known to the Hon. Wm. Terrell
Hodges from earlier cases, see Notice of Filing Disability Information of Neil J.
Gillespie, Case 5: 10-cv-00503-WTH-TBS Doc. 36 Filed 07/07/11. Also see Case 5: 11-
cv-00539-WTH-TBS Doc. 15-1.
Florida Bar Rule 4-8.4(d) should protect me, a disabled adult and litigant: "A lawyer shall not
engage in conduct in connection with the practice of law that is prejudicial to the administration
ofjustice, including to knowingly, or through callous indifference, disparage, humiliate, or
discriminate against litigants... on any basis, including, but not limited to ... disability...."
Negligence per se: Violation of statutes or regulatory provision that either are designed to protect
a particular class of persons from their inability to protect themselves or establishes a duty to
take precautions to guard a certain class of persons from a specific type of injury. Failure to do
so establishes negligence per see Florida Freight Terminals, Inc. v. Cabanas, 354 So. 2d 1222
(Fla. Dist. Ct. App., 3d Dist. 1978).
The Eggshell Skull Rule holds a defendant is liable for the plaintiffs unforeseeable and
uncommon reactions to the defendant's negligent or intentional tort. If the defendant commits a
tort against the plaintiff without a complete defense, the defendant becomes liable for any injury
that is magnified by the plaintiffs peculiar characteristics.
http://www.law.cornell. edu/wex/eggshell_skull_rule
Florida Bar Rule 3-7.4(e) No Delay for Civil or Criminal Proceedings. An investigation shall not
be deferred or suspended without the approval of the board even though the respondent is made a
party to civil litigation or is a defendant or is acquitted in a criminal action, notwithstanding that
either of such proceedings involves the subject matter of the investigation.
Under penalty of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing document and that to the best
of my knowledge and belief the facts stated in it are true.
Sincerely,
Neil J. Gillespi' "
8092 SW 115th ~
Ocala, Florida 34481 http://www.scribd.com/doc/186795734/uPL-Complaint-YIM
Note: This UPL complaint exhausted The Florida Bar's 25 page limit, as follows: UPL complaint
form (1 page), this complaint (23 pages), and the Index to Exhibits (1 page). Thus, the 52 pages of
Exhibits shown on the Index are available on request, or online at the above URL.
UPL Complaint - Yolanda I. Martinez - December 1, 2013
Index to Exhibits - due to The Bars 25 page limit, Exhibits are available, not enclosed.
The complaint posted online includes all Exhibits, see http://www.scribd.com/doc/186795734/
Exhibit 1 Ethics Opinion 70-62, The Florida Bar
Exhibit 2 Paralegals in a law office and the unlicensed practice of law. (UPL Update)
Exhibit 3 Invoice $5.95, Amazon Order J une 3, 2013, Paralegals in a law office and UPL
Exhibit 4 Yolanda I. Martinezs paralegal profile, LinkedIn
Exhibit 5 Email of Yolanda I. Martinez, February 21, 2013 2.52 PM
Exhibit 6 Evidence of ex-parte email U.S. District Court and Danielle N. Parsons
Exhibit 7 August 7, 2013 email 1.44pm paralegal Martinez/McCalla Raymer LLC to Gillespie
Exhibit 8 August 7, 2013, email 4.07pm Gillespie to paralegal Yolanda Martinez/McCalla
Raymer LLC, w/attached letter to Clerk
Exhibit 9 August 7, 2013, email 4.18pm paralegal Yolanda Martinez/McCalla Raymer
LLC to Gillespie, w/attached court order denied reconsideration
Exhibit 10 August 7, 2013, email 4.50pm Gillespie to paralegal Yolanda Martinez/ McCalla
Raymer LLC, w/attached letter-Sen. Nelson w/information for judicial complaint
Exhibit 11 U.S. Congressman Elijah E. Cummings letter Feb-25-11 to FHFA, McCalla Raymer
Exhibit 12 Notice of Defendants' Consent to J udgment, case no. 2013-CA-000115
Exhibit 13 Gillespies denial of UPL accusation, Page 34, Petition No. 13-7280 SCOTUS
Exhibit 14 Email J uly 5, 2013 Robin McGough paralegal for Curtis A. Wilson, Esq.
McCalla Raymer to Neil Gillespie: The correct email address for service is
MRService@mccallaraymer.com. RE: Service of Court Document, 13-11585-B
VIA U.P.S. No.: 1Z64589FP297401503 December 20, 2013
and email: mschneider@floridajqc.com
Michael Schneider, General Counsel, and c/o,
Rick Morales J QC Commission Chair
J QC Commission Members, list attached/enclosed
Brooke S. Kennerly, Executive Director
J udicial Qualifications Commission - J QC
1110 Thomasville Road
RE: Letter of Mr. Schneider dated November 22, 2013, copy attached/enclosed
Dear Mr. Schneider:
This is in response to your letter dated November 22, 2013 that stated in part:
This will acknowledge receipt of your letter dated November 21, 2013 with the attached
complaint. As you know complaints to the Commission are confidential pursuant to the
Florida Constitution and the Florida Rules of J udicial Administration. Since that
confidentiality pertains to judges, complainants and the Commission, no one party may
validly waive the confidentiality that attaches to the Commission proceedings.
I believe Mr. Rodems constructively waived confidentiality by attaching an unsigned sham order
of J udge Martha marionette Cook
1
to a vexatious UPL complaint against me. J udge Cooks

1
J udicial candidate Martha Cook accepted campaign donations from attorney Ryan C. Rodems,
and two of my former lawyers, his partners William J . Cook and J onathan Alpert. J udge Cook
was expected to act favorably to the donors as opportunities arose. J udge Cook and Mr. Rodems
engaged in honest services fraud September 10, 2010 with J udge Cook presiding during an ex
parte hearing on final summary judgment in Gillespie v Barker, Rodems & Cook, 05-CA-7205.
J udge Cook accepted things of value in return for official acts. 18 U.S.C. 201(b)(2).
J udge Cook falsified the record that I elected to leave the hearing, in violation of F.S.
839.13(1) and 837.06, when in fact she ordered me removed, then ruled favorably for Rodems.
Hillsborough Deputy Christopher E. Brown, and Major J ames Livingston, provided evidence
that J udge Cook and Mr. Rodems collaborated and falsified the record of the hearing. J udge
Cook and Rodems used the mail to carry out their scheme or artifice to defraud me of the
intangible right of honest services. 18 U.S.C. 1346. U.S. v. Terry, No. 11-4130, C.A.6.
As in Terry, J udge Cooks collaboration came relatively cheap, $300 in her initial 2002 bid, $100
each from Messrs. Rodems, Cook, and Alpert. An honest services fraud agreement need not spell
out which payments control which act, just that J udge Cook was expected to act favorably to the
donor as opportunities arose. Terry at p. 6. J udge Cook failed to discharge her judicial duties
without fraud, concealment, bias, favoritism or conflict of interest, but acted like Mr. Rodems
marionette. Terry at p. 11.
28 correction
Michael Schneider, General Counsel December 20, 2013
Florida J udicial Qualifications Commission Page - 2
sham order was corruptly entered November 15, 2010 in my civil lawsuit with Mr. Rodems,
Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems & Cook, 05-CA-7205 Hillsborough Co., Thirteenth J udicial Circuit.
Although the above cited case closed over two years ago, J udge Cooks sham order is being used
against me today by Rodems as part of systemic political persecution of me by The Florida Bar,
U.S. J udge Hodges, and attorney Eugene Castagliuolo, in retaliation for petitioning for a redress
of grievances in Petition No. 12-7747 for writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court. Enclosed
please find my Urgent Appeal to the United Nations dated October 25, 2013 for protection from
political persecution in the United States.
I asked UPL Bar prosecutor Mr. Coaxum to strike the unsigned sham order of J udge Cook as
corrupt evidence in a political persecution of me. Mr. Coaxum referred me to the J QC because
[he is] not a member of the judiciary. But Mr. Coaxums duty as a prosecutor to strike the
order from evidence is within his authority and discretion as a Bar prosecutor.
The prosecutor is obligated to seek truth and to "do justice." See Model Rules of Professional
Conduct Rule 3.8 Cmt. (1) (1983)(describing prosecutors as "minister[s] of justice"); Model
Code of Professional Responsibility EC7-13 (1981) (stating that prosecutors must "seek
justice"); ABA Standards for CriminaIJ ustice A 3-1.2(c) (3d ed. 1993) ("The duty of the
prosecutor is to seek justice, not merely to convict").
In compliance with Mr. Coaxums referral to the J QC, I submitted a complaint against J udge
Cook November 20, 2013. I have your letter of December 10, 2013 for Docket No. 13573 that
corruptly denied my complaint against Martha marionette Cook. So nothing was resolved by
the corrupt J udicial Protection Society Qualifications Commission. I do not intend to stand idly
by the rest of my life as Rodems drags out one of J udge Cooks sham orders on a whim to
corruptly engage The Florida Bar in political persecution of me.
The unsigned sham order of Martha marionette Cook and vexatious UPL complaint is before,
inter alia, the U.S. Supreme Court in Petition No. 13-7280. So that is what I meant by,
Confidentiality Waived:
This matter is in the public domain,
Petition No. 13-7280 SCOTUS; and
The Florida Bar UPL Investigation
No. 20133090(5) of Neil J . Gillespie,
initiated by attorney Ryan C Rodems
Therefore my complaint December 19, 2013 for Chief J udge Manuel Menendez J r. noted that
confidentiality is constructively waived. I hope that resolves the issue and any confusion.
Michael Schneider, General Counsel December 20, 2013
Florida J udicial Qualifications Commission Page - 3
You also wrote in your letter November 22, 2013:
As you know complaints to the Commission are confidential pursuant to the Florida
Constitution and the Florida Rules of J udicial Administration.
No Mr. Schneider, I do not know that as an ultimate statement of law. First, your position
assumes an inviolate Constitution and laws of Florida, and rules that are equally applied.
Currently the rule of law in Florida is fantasy as applied to lawyer and judicial misconduct.
Unfortunately current oversight of lawyers and judges in Florida is a cesspool of corruption.
Nonetheless, I take your letter as evidence to expect legal action based on confidentially rules
that violate First Amendment speech and right to petition, among others. Second, meritorious
J QC complaints wrongly dismissed in the past are evidence, inter alia, in Petition No. 13-7280
to the U.S. Supreme Court, which is a matter of public record not subject to confidentiality. The
state of Florida was given notice of a constitutional challenge to, inter alia, Fla. Stat., sec. 43.20
J udicial Qualifications Commission. Therefore I have a duty to provide evidence in the matter.
On information and belief, you, Executive Director Brooke Kennerly, and the Commission
members 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 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. 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.
Sincerely,
Neil J . Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Enclosures/attachments
Cc by email: United Nations, with this letter, list of J QC complaints, and Mr. Schneiders letter.
J UDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION MEMBERS
December 19, 2013
Mr. Ricardo (Rick) Morales, III , CHAIR
President, Morales Construction Co., Inc.
The Morales Group
6950 Philips Highway, Suite 15
J acksonville, FL 32216
Hon. Kerry I. Evander, VICE-CHAIR
Florida Bar ID Number: 302597
Fifth District Court of Appeal
300 S Beach St.
Daytona Beach, Florida 32114-5002
Alan B. Bookman, Esq.
Emmanuel Sheppard & Condon, P.A.
PO Box 1271
Pensacola, Florida 32591-1271
Ms. Shirlee P. Bowne
Tallahassee, Florida (retired)
Michelle K. Cummings, Esq.
GrayRobinson, P.A.
401 E Las Olas Blvd Ste 1850
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301-4236
Mayanne Downs, Esq.
GrayRobinson P A
301 E Pine St. Fl 14
Orlando, Florida 32801-2724
Mr. Harry R. Duncanson, C.P.A.
9704 Waters Meet Drive
Hon. Thomas B. Freeman
Pinellas Co. C J C, Florida
Hon. Krista Marx
205 N Dixie Hwy.
West Palm Beach, Florida 334014-5222
Steven R. Maxwell, Ed.D.
Educator, School District of Lee County
Sanibel, Florida
Hon. Michelle T. Morley
Sumter County Courthouse
215 E McCollum Ave.
Bushnell, Florida 33513-6120
Hon. Robert Morris
2nd District Court of Appeal
PO Box 327
Lakeland, Florida 33802-0327
J erome S. Osteryoung, Ph.D.
Professor of Finance
FSU, Tallahassee Florida
Hon. J ames A. Ruth
Duval County Courthouse
501 W Adams St. Rm. 7159
J acksonville, Florida 32202-4603
J ohn G. (J ay) White, III, Esq.
Richman Greer P.A.
250 S Australian Ave Ste 1504
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-5016
_________________________________
Executive Director, Brooke S. Kennerly
General Counsel, Michael L. Schneider
RICARDO "RICK" MORALES, III
CHAIR
HON. KERRY!. EVANDER
VICE - CHAIR
MICHAEL L. SCHNEIDER
GENERALCOUNSEL
STATE OF FLORIDA
~ U D I I L QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION
I I 10THOMASVILLE ROAD
TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32303-6224
(850) 488- I 58I
November22, 2013
8092SW11S
th
Loop
Ocala, FL34481
Re: Inquiry No. 13-573
DearMr. Gillespie:
This will acknowledge receipt ofyour letterdated November21, 2013 with
the attached complaint. As you know complaints to the Commission are
confidential pursuant to the Florida Constitution and the Florida Rules ofJudicial
Administration. Sincethatconfidentiality pertainstojudges, complainantsand the
Commission, noonepartymayvalidlywaivetheconfidentialitythatattachestothe
Commissionproceedings.
In regard to your request for past members they include: Judge James
Wolf, Judge Paul Backman, Judge Morris Silberman, Judge J. Preston Silvernail,
Henry Coxe, Randolph Bracy, John Cardillo, Leonard Haber and Terrence
Russell.
TheCommission isdivided intoan Investig.ativePaneland aHearingPanel.
Therefore, itcannot be assumed thata memberofthe Commission reviewed any
particularinquiry.
Yourstruly,
MichaelL. Schneider
.GeneralCounsel
MLS/km
i., .'. .w 11' n' _- "i r ,'rtC rn; , 'l' It 'im'tlll1 m'. .i,., ,t_
Fl 323
--
:tI=EH3iGY
22 fllO\f 2013Pfa.-1 3 T
.- . FOItEVl:R
...
-
STATEOFFLORIDA
JUDICIALQUALIFICATIONSCOMMISSION
1110THOMASVILLEROAD
TALLAHASSEE,FLORIDA32303-6224
1 11 1 1.1 11111 1111 1
8092 SW 11S
th
Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
3448i ::E:3557 jjJ!;I i j i jiiJ iIjiJjii JJij iiJjI ji j JiJjjj j J IJjIi J J' I i1J1Jj j I; j ;Hi i
hi ,j" a' 2,..... U ; J

Gov-Scott-notice-AG-Pam-Bondi-FS-16.02-appointment Needed FCHR No. 201400117

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Gov-Scott-notice-AG-Pam-Bondi-FS-16.02-appointment Needed FCHR No. 201400117

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

J odi J ones, Regulatory Specialist Governor Rick Scott

Florida Commission on Human Relations Office of Governor Rick Scott

Anda mungkin juga menyukai