petitioner's motion to extend time petitioner's request to toll time, sc14-1637
Post on 02-Jun-2018
221 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 1/19
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDASTATE OF FLORIDA
NEIL J. GILLESPIE,
Petitioner pro se (nonlawyer),CASE NO.: SC14-1637
VS.
THE FLORIDA BAR,
Respondent. _________________________________ /
Petitioner’s Motion to Extend Time
1. The Petitioner, Neil J. Gillespie, a disabled nonlawyer reluctantly appearing pro se,
henceforth in the first person, moves to extend time under Fla. R. App. P. 9.300(a), and Fla. R.
Jud. Admin. 2.514, and states:
2. This Court’s ORDER entered August 22, 2014 (Exhibit A) held inter alia,
Petitioner's letter, filed in this Court on August 20, has been treated as a petition for writof mandamus. Petitioner is allowed to and including September 11, 2014, in which to file
a proper petition for writ of mandamus; that complies with Florida Rule of AppellateProcedure 9.100.
3. A separate ORDER entered by this Court August 22, 2014 (Exhibit B) held inter alia,
The jurisdiction of this Court was invoked by the filing of a Petition for Writ of Mandamus; however, said petition was not accompanied by the $300.00 filing fee or a proper motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis as required by Florida Rule of
Appellate Procedure 9.100(b). The filing fee is due and payable at the time of filing the petition. Petitioner is allowed to and including September 22, 2014, in which to submitthe filing fee or a proper motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis....
4. Under Fla. R. App. P. 9.300(a), Motions, and Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.514, Computing and
Extending Time, I respectfully request the Supreme Court extend time for 33 days to and
including October 14, 2014 (Exhibit C) to file a proper petition for writ of mandamus, and
proper motion to proceed in forma pauperis, so that I may obtain counsel of my choice.
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 2/19
2
5. In support of this motion to extend time, I have been reluctantly appearing pro se in the
following legal matters which have taken considerable time, in addition to SC14-1637:
• Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. v. Neil J. Gillespie, et al., Marion County Florida, Fifth
Judicial Circuit, No. 42-2013CA-000115-AXXX-XX, a.k.a. case no. 2013-CA-000115.Wrongful home foreclosure on a HECM reverse mortgage.
• The Unlicensed Practice of Law (UPL) Investigation of Neil J. Gillespie, Case No.20133090(5), initiated on the complaint of Ryan Christopher Rodems.
• Complaint of Neil J. Gillespie against Danielle Nicole Parsons, File No. 2014-30,525 (09A). Notice of Assignment of Investigating Member and/or Panel, September 2, 2014. (Exhibit D)
• My request to the Senate Judiciary Committee for a hearing for the Nomination of Arthur Lee Bentley III for United States Attorney, and request to present testimony (enclosed)
• My request to the U.S. Post Office for the Postal Inspection Service to prosecute mail fraud in the fraud or impairment of Petition No. 12-7747, a legitimate government activity, 18U.S.C. § 371, a conspiracy against my rights, 18 U.S.C. § 241, and a deprivation of my rightsunder color of law, 18 U.S.C. § 242, by Pam Bondi, Attorney General of Florida, et al.
• Fraud or impairment of SCOTUS Petition No. 12-7747 by Florida Chief Justice RickyPolston, Judge Claudia Rickert Isom, and Florida Bar President Gwynne Alice Young, seemy letter August 28, 2014 to Mr. Pimentel Storbeck/Pimentel & Associates, Inc. (enclosed)
6. In compliance with Rule 9.300(d)(10), I request the Supreme Court toll time. A separate
request to toll time accompanies this motion.
7. Clerk John Tomasino emailed me August 26, 2014 9:15 AM (Exhibit E):
Mr. Gillespie,In the sixth paragraph of your August 25, 2014 letter, you ask for my advice on whether “Rule 1-14.1(a) Access To Records might be useful in this instance as an “add on” to theRule 1-14.1(a) request submitted to you.” I am unable to offer any advice, as the Clerk’srole is simply ministerial. I regret I am unable to assist you further.Sincerely,John Tomasino
8. The August 25, 2014 letter referred to by Mr. Tomasino is with Exhibit E.
9. Clerk John Tomasino emailed me August 27, 2014 at 8:50 AM (Exhibit F):
Mr. Gillespie,
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 3/19
3
In the second to last paragraph of your first attachment, you make references to SC14-1637, and appear to be making requests regarding that case. I’m unsure if you intend your email to serve as an official request, so I wanted to explain that any requests related toSC14-1637 must be made through a proper filing. There are three ways to file on a case:1) By carrier delivery; 2) by hand delivery; and/or 3) by filing through the E-Filing
Portal. Our office cannot accept case related filings via email. You may register for anaccount at this website:
https://www.myflcourtaccess.com/default.aspx
Your email received on Tuesday, September 26, 2014 (sic), and four attachments will be placed in our miscellaneous file and no action will be taken on those items.
10. My email, the four attached letters referenced by Mr. Tomasino, and my letter to Mr.Tomasino, are enclosed. The date was August 26, 2014. (Not September 26, 2014).
WHEREFORE, I respectfully move the Supreme Court to extend time for 33 days to and
including October 14, 2014 to file a proper petition for writ of mandamus, and proper motion to
proceed in forma pauperis, so that I may obtain counsel of my choice.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED September 11, 2014.
Neil J. Gillespie, petitioner pro se8092 SW 115
th Loop
Ocala, Florida 34481Telephone: (352) 854-7807
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 4/19
Certificate of Service
I HEREBY CERTIFY that Petitioner’s Motion to Extend Time, and attachments, and
Petitioner’s Separate Request to Toll Time, were furnished VIA UPS No. 1Z64589FP290364263
on September 11, 2014, and by Email: tomasino@flcourts.org, to
Mr. John A. Tomasino, Clerk
Supreme Court of Florida
500 South Duval Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1927
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a PDF copy of Petitioner’s Motion to Extend Time, and
attachments, and Petitioner’s Separate Request to Toll Time, has been furnished by email
September 11, 2014 to:
Adria E. Quintela, Director of Lawyer Regulation,
The Florida Bar, aquintel@flabar.org
John F. Harkness, Executive Director,
The Florida Bar, jharkness@flabar.org
Neil J. Gillespie, petitioner pro se
8092 SW 115th
Loop
Ocala, Florida 34481
Telephone: (352) 854-7807
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 5/19
~ u p r
<tourt of jflortba
FRIDAY, AUGUST 22, 2014
CASE NO.:
SC14-1637
NEIL J GILLESPIE
vs. THE FLORIDA
B R
Petitioner(s) Respondent(s)
Petitioner s letter, filed in this Court on August 20, has been treated as a
petition for writ of mandamus.
Petitioner is allowed to and including Septenlber 11, 2014, in which to file a
proper petition for writ of nlandamus; that complies with Florida Rule
of
Appellate
Procedure
9 1
00.
The failure to file a proper petition with this Court within the time provided
could result in the imposition of sanctions, including dismissal of this case. See
Fla.
R
App.
P
9.410.
Please understand that once this case is dismissed, it may not be subject to
reinstatement.
A True Copy
Test:
tg
Served:
ADRIA E QUINTELA
NEIL J GILLESPIE
A
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 6/19
~ u p r ourt
o jflortba
FRIDAY,
AUGUST 22 2014
CASE NO.:
SC14-1637
NEIL J. GILLESPIE
vs. THE FLORIDA
BAR
Petitioner(s)
Respondent(s)
The jurisdiction of this Court was invoked by the filing of a Petition for Writ
of Mandamus; however, said petition was not accompanied by the 300.00 filing
fee or a proper motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis as required
y
Florida
Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.1 OO b). The filing fee is due and payable at the time
of
filing the petition. Petitioner is allowed to and including September 22, 2014, in
which to submit the filing fee or a proper motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis. The petition will not be submitted to the Court until receipt
of
the above.
Failure to submit the above referenced documents to this COllrt could result in the
imposition
of
sanctions, including dismissal of the petition.
Please understand that once this case is dismissed, it is not subject to
reinstatement.
A True Copy
Test:
~ o m s n o
Clerk., SupremeCourt
tg
Served:
ADRIA E. QUINTELA
NEIL
J.
GILLESPIE
B
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 7/19
This service enables you to add or subtract days, months and years to a date to calculate a past or future date.
Design changes: What is new and why?
From Thursday, September 11, 2014
Added 33 days
Result: Tuesday, October 14, 2014
Copyright © Time and Date AS 1995–2014. All rights reserved.
http://www.timeanddate.com/date/dateadded.html?m1=9&d1=11&y1=2014&type=add&ay=&am=&aw
C
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 8/19
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
(Before a Grievance Con1mittee)
IN RE: Complaint by Neil
J
Gillespie against Danielle Nicole Parsons
The Florida Bar File No. 2014-30,525 (9A)
NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF INVESTIGATING MEMBER
AND/OR PANEL
TO:
Neil
J
Gillespie
Barry Rodney Davidson
8092 SW 115th Loop
Counsel for Respondent
Ocala, FL 34481
Barclays Financial Center
1111 Brickell Ave. Floor 25
Miami, FL 33131-3101
Tele: (305)810-2500
bdavidson@hunton.com
The complaint is hereby assigned to the following member(s)
of the committee for
investigation:
Jon Marshall Oden
Frank Harlan Killgore Jr.
Ball Janik L.L.P.
Killgore, Pearlman, Stamp, Ornstein
201 E
Pine St. Ste .825 Squires
Orlando, FL 3280-12764
P.O. Box 1913
Tele: (407)902-2077
Orlando, FL 3280-21913
Tele: (407)425-1020
Notice is given that this case will be considered by the committee.
Respondent and complainant shall contact the investigating members within
10
days from the date
of
this notice to discuss the investigation of this matter.
DATED this 2day of September, 2014.
Patricia Ann Toro Savitz
D
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 9/19
Bar Counsel
The Florida Bar
1000 Legion Place, Suite 1625
Orlando, Florida 32801-1050
(407) 425-5424
psavitz@flabar.org
Copies furnished to:
Frank H. Killgore Jr., Chair, Ninth Judicial Circuit Grievance Committee A and
Investigating Member
Jon Marshall Oden, Investigating Member
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 10/19
••
iI I '
. . . .
.
i •
ii
• ' I r
I
.
1
~ \ G t S .
PUlis.
~ m )
THE FLORIDA
BAR
~ ~ € S s ~
~ f G
1000 LEGION
PLACE, SUITE
1625
..... /:
C:}
~
, • -
~ ... . .
i'
:;
ORLANDO, FL
32801-1050
~ - P I T N E Y B O
i
..
oJ:
~ : : ~ 2 1P 000.4
I.tG
P R O F ~ C » c ~
®
I:
0000838325 SEP 02
r c
. en
MAILED FROM
ZIP
CODE 3
isit
our
website www.FLORIDABAR.org
Mr. Neil
J.
Gillespie
8092 Sw 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
3448i35E:792
I jJJ
JJ', If luijlJl..
J,
II II
JlJu
h '11', JI' II J
IJ.
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 11/19
Neil Gillespie
From: "John A. Tomasino" <tomasino@flcourts.org>To: "'Neil Gillespie'" <neilgillespie@mfi.net>Cc: "Tad David" <davidt@flcourts.org>Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 9:15 AMSubject: RE: OSCA Records, Florida Commission on Human Relations FCHR; Florida Unborn Victims of
Violence Act
Page 1 of 1
9/11/2014
Mr. Gillespie,
In the sixth paragraph of your August 25, 2014 letter, you ask for my advice on whether “Rule
1-14.1(a) Access To Records might be useful in this instance as an “add on” to the Rule 1-
14.1(a) request
submitted to you.” I am unable to offer any advice, as the Clerk’s role is simply ministerial. I
regret I am unable to assist you further.
Sincerely,
ohn Tomasino
From Neil Gillespie [mailto:neilgillespie@mfi.net]
Sent Monday, August 25, 2014 4:57 PM
To Tad David; John A. Tomasino; Jack Harkness; Gov. Rick Scott; Adam Putnam, Comm.; Jeff
Atwater, CFO; Pam Bondi, AG; FL Comm Human Relations; Michelle Wilson; Jodi Jones;
Gregory W. Coleman; John Thomas Berry; Paul Hill; Ramon A. Abadin; Public Information
c Neil Gillespie
Subject OSCA Records, Florida Commission on Human Relations FCHR; Florida Unborn
Victims of Violence Act
E
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 12/19
VIA Email: davidt@flcourts.org August 25, 2014
Thomas A. "Tad" David, General Counsel cc: John A. Tomasino, Clerk, Florida
Office of the State Courts Administrator Supreme Court, tomasino@flcourts.org
Supreme Court Building
500 South Duval Street cc: John F. Harkness, Executive Director Tallahassee, FL 32399 The Florida Bar, jharkness@flabar.org
RE: Florida Commission on Human Relations FCHR, Public Records, Loyalty oaths,
876.05 Public employees; oath; Oath of Office, Article II, Section 5(b), Fla. Const.
Dear Mr. David:
Attached you will find my records request July 16, 2014 to Michelle Wilson, Executive Director,
Florida Commission on Human Relations (FCHR), and Jodi Jones, Regulatory Specialist, in the
Disability Discrimination Complaint of Neil J. Gillespie submitted December 10, 2013 to the
Commission, FCHR No. 201400117. I also requested the current status of my complaint.
I requested records of the loyalty oath, as a recipient of public funds from the state of Florida,
that he/she supports the Constitution of the United States, and Florida, for Ms. Wilson and Ms.
Jones. I requested records of the Oath of Office for the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, and each
Commissioner of the FCHR required by Article II, Section 5(b), Fla. Const.
As of today I do not have a response from Ms. Wilson, Ms. Jones or anyone on behalf of the FCHR.
Mr. David, insofar as complaint FCHR No. 201400117 named employees of the OSCA, the
Office of State Court Administrator may have responsive records. If so, this is a request for those
records, and any other records about complaint FCHR No. 201400117.
Mr. Harkness, insofar as complaint FCHR No. 201400117 named the Executive Director of The
Florida Bar et al., The Bar may have responsive records. If so, this is a request for those records,
and any other records about complaint FCHR No. 201400117.
Mr. Tomasino, insofar as complaint FCHR No. 201400117 rises from my use of the Florida
Courts to petition the Government for a redress of grievances, please advise if Rule 1-14.1(a)
Access To Records might be useful in this instance as an “add on” to the Rule 1-14.1(a) request
submitted to you. The right to petition the Government for a redress of grievances is protected by
the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and Article I, Section 21, Access to Courts, of the
Florida Constitution. Please note, I still have additional information to submit under Rule 1-14.1.
The Florida legislature recently passed the Florida Unborn Victims of Violence Act, Bodily
injury to an unborn child, CS/HB 59: Offenses Against Unborn Children, found at these links,
https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2014/0059
https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2014/0162/?Tab=RelatedBills
http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2014/0059/BillText/er/PDF
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 13/19
Thomas A. "Tad" David, General Counsel August 25, 2014
Office of the State Courts Administrator Page - 2
In my view Florida does not have an adequate program of habilitation for persons born with
physical birth defects. Therefore, I believe a constitutional challenge is needed to amend the
Florida Unborn Victims of Violence Act to include all unborn children. Otherwise a law that
only protects certain unborn children in a few circumstances appears unconstitutional.
Nhu Nguyen, born in Vietnam, believes her birth defect was caused by Agent Orange, described in“Babbling about my birth defect” on YouTube. Nhu was born with a cleft lip and palate, a serious
physical birth defect that may affect speech, hearing, breathing, eating, socializing and appearance.
Congenital craniofacial deformity may stigmatize a person; effects of stigma can last a lifetime.
Nhu Nguyen: “Babbling about my birth defect” Birth Defect Research for Children (BDRC)
http://youtu.be/g368cugbWZQ http://youtu.be/-Tmbm9mIJwA
Ten million gallons of Agent Orange were sprayed during the Vietnam War. Eighteen different
birth defects have been service-connected in children of women veterans who served in Vietnam.
Attached you will find evidence of my physical disability, and evidence that Barker, Rodems &
Cook, PA investigated my claim of discrimination/negligence against the State of Florida and its
Vocational Rehabilitation Program (DVR). In turn Florida/DVR’s discrimination prevented anaccurate assessment and mandated services under section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1974.
Evidence shows Mr. Rodems later used my confidential client information against me, client
information learned from his firm’s prior representation of me. Mr. Rodems breached, inter alia,
his duty to avoid a limitation on independent professional judgment, violated Rules 4-1.7, 4-1.9,
4-1.10; and the holding of, inter alia, McPartland v. ISI Inv. Services, Inc., 890 F.Supp. 1029,
M.D.Fla., 1995; and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v K.A.W, 575 So. 2d 630
(Fla. 1991). Unfortunately The Florida Bar failed to protect me, a consumer of legal and court
services, from Mr. Rodems, et al. Article V, Section 15, Attorneys; admission and discipline.
Thank you in advance for the courtesy of a response. Sincerely,
Neil J. Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop Telephone: (352) 854-7807
Ocala, Florida 34481 Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net attachments
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 14/19
UF could not maintain Dr. Kusiak’s photo of my CPCF Journal, unoperated adult
my speech obturator oral-nasal fistula, 1985 July 1992, Vol. 29 No.4, page 371
Mr. Rodems’ breached his duty to avoid a limitation on independent professional judgment, violated
Rules 4-1.7, 4-1.9, 4-1.10; McPartland v. ISI Inv. Services, Inc., 890 F.Supp. 1029, M.D.Fla., 1995
Transcript, March 3, 2006, page 6
4 MR. GILLESPIE: Now, you call here and just5 marched into a tirade of insults.6 MR. RODEMS: No, actually I haven't insulted7 you at all. I've never said anything about you. I8 just said that you don't really know the law9 because you don't know how to practice law.
Transcript, March 3, 2006, page 7
24 MR. RODEMS: Didn't you at one time purchase a25 car so that you could get the cash rebate to get
Transcript, March 3, 2006, page 8
1 some dental work done? We're going to get to the2 discovery, anyhow, so just tell me, did that really3 happen?4 MR. GILLESPIE: What?5 MR. RODEMS: Did you purchase a car so that
6 you could get the cash rebate to get some dental7 work done?8 MR. GILLESPIE: Listen, this is why you need9 to be disqualified.10 MR. RODEMS: No, I mean, that's -- because I11 know that? Because I know that to be a fact?12 MR. GILLESPIE: You know it to be a fact from13 your previous representation of me.14 MR. RODEMS: Well, you know, see that's --15 MR. GILLESPIE: If it is -- if it's a fact,16 anyway.17 MR. RODEMS: You need to study the rules and18 regulations of the Florida Bar because when you19 make --20 MR. GILLESPIE: I think, I think I bought a21 car so I would have something to drive. I don't22 know why you buy cars, but that's why I bought it.
Transcript, March 3, 2006, page 9
MR. RODEMS: Okay. Well, I just want to be20 clear because I understand that in talking with you21 it's very important to be precise because you don't22 really have a good command of the language that,23 you know, lawyers speak.
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 15/19
•
• •
• •
415-13
Rev.
]-
MERIC N ONCOLOGIC
HOSPIT L
CHART COpy
ROGRESS REPORT
Notll prairllss of caslI. complications. chanilll n dlaposls
condition
on
dlscharill . Instructions
to
patlllnt
GILLESPIE, Neil
74123
7/22/85
The pa t i en t i s a 9 year old white male r e f e r r e d by Dr. Carver
who i s s t a t us
pos t
l e f t un i l a t e ra l 'Class IV l i p and pa la t e r e pa i r
a t approximate ly age two
years old .
e
i s unc lear
about the de ta i l s
o f the degree o f h i s de fec t s , the su rg ica l
procedures ,
who performed
th i s , or
exac t ly
where it was done.
Apparent ly ,
a f t e r
the
i n i t i a l
bout of su rge r i es to repa i r
the
l i p and hard and so f t
pa l a t e , he
had
no fu r the r su rg ica l
in tervent ion . e
had no
ongoing fol low-up
for
t h i s problem. At approximate ly age
13
to 14 years o ld ,
he
underwent
or thodont ic
t rea tment
a t Temple Univers i ty
Ho spi ta l s
Dental
School
and t h i s u l t ima te ly resu l t ed in the placement
of
a
r e t a i n e r with
a
pros the t ic
l e f t l a t e r a l inc i sor . e has worn t h i s s ince t ha t t ime.
e no t ices dra inage of food i n to the l e f t nasal
f loor .
His l e f t and
· r igh t
n o s t r i l s
are opened, although the l e f t i s
somewhat
s t u f fy
and
occluded.
His
main concerns upon presen ta t ion
are re la ted to
the
pe r s i s t e n t
c l e f t in the l e f t alveolus , the dra in ing f i s tu la ,
and
the
poss i b i l i t y
of
foregoing
the
need
fOD a
pros the t i c
device.
In
add i t ion ,
however,
it i s
obvious on
confront ing
the
pa t ien t t ha t
he has
a moderate
amount
o f
nasal
deformi ty , f l a t t e n ing
o f
the l e f t
s ide in the
premaxi l la ry
region,
and
l i p d i s t o r t i on , pa r t i c u l a r ly
a t
the vermi l ion .
In
addi t ion ,
the
pa t i e n t has
a s ign i f i c a n t ly hypernasal
speech pa t t e rn
with ~ v o u s
velopharyngeal
incompetence.
On phys ical examinat ion beginning ex te rna l ly , the p a t i e n t has
a s l igh t ly
l a rge
nose with a small
dorsa l
hump. The
s i z e of the nose
i s s l i gh t ly l a rge r
than
propor t ional t o h i s face , a l though not
exaggera ted ly so.
The
r i gh t
a l a r
dome i s fu l l .
The
l e f t a la r
ca r t i l age
i s pos t e r io r ly and l a t e r a l ly displaced and somewhat
hypoplas t ic compared to the l e f t s ide .
The
l e f t a la r base
i s
a l so
l a t e r a l l y
d isp laced .
The nos t r i l
sill
i s
f l a t t e ne d ,
and
there
i s
an obvious
f i s t u l a between the
d i s t a l nasa l
f loo r and the ora l
cavi ty . The l e f t columella , l ikewise,
i s somewhat hypop las t i c and
twis ted .
The
upper
l i p
sca r
i s well
healed
and appears to be a
LeMesurier o r Tennison-Randal l
type
repa i r .
The upper
l i p
tuberc le
i s preserved, but the vermil ion border i s
somewhat
i r r egu la r .
Length appears , however, to
be
sa t i s fac tory .
There i s
a - l a t e r a l
orb i c u l a r i s
bulge o f the
l e f t upper l ip . In t e rna l ly , t he re
i s
a
wide
c l e f t of the l e f t a lveo la r r idge
a t
the l evel of the l a t e r a l i nc i so r
with
a f i s t u l a i n to the nasa l f loor . This runs
pos t e r i o r l y
and nearly
to
the end o f the secondary pa la te . The so f t
pa la te has
a l i nea r
scar
it
i s
very
shor t , and there
i s l a t e r a l
movement
but no
cen t ra l movemen
of note .
cont inued •
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 16/19
GILLESPIE Nei l
Page
Two
7/22/85
y
impress ion
and recommendation to
the pa t i en t
genera ted
th ree
s pec i f i c areas of i n t e r e s t . One r e l a t e s to the s c a r r ev i s ion
of
h is
upper nose and
the
r e l a t i ons h i ps
of hi s
nasa l
t i p ,
nose
and
secondary
defo rmi t i e s
in
t h i s
area .
The
second
a rea o f
i n t e re s t
in importance i s the
a lveo la r
c l e f t with the
naso -o ra l f i s t u l a .
The t h i r d a rea i s
the
pa la t e with obvious ve lopharyngea l incompetence
and
a
foreshor t
and sca r red pa l a t e .
y i n i t i a l recommendations wi l l
be
t ha t the
pa t i en t undergo
or thodont ic evalua t ion .
I w i l l
ar range
for
him to
see
Dr. Rosario
Mayro fo r eva lua t ion
as
wel l as
x-rays
to assess
his occ lusa l
r e la t ionsh ips . t a l so
should
be
noted
t ha t he, i n gene ra l ,
had
a f a i r ly s a t i s f ac to ry
occ lusa l re l a t ionsh ip .wi th
some
l a t e r a l
col lapse
and
c ros s b i t e on
the minor segment
on
the l e f t
and eva lua te h i s
adequacy
as a
candida te for bone g r f t i n ~ w h i h
I
th ink he would
qua l i fy . Subsequent to
t h i s ,
I w i l l
have him see Dr. Harvey Rosen
concerning
the
ac tua l surg i ca l
procedure
and
a l s o
he
w i l l
be
seen
by
Miss Mari lyn Cohen
a speech pa tho log i s t
with
s pec i a l
i n t e r e s t
in
pa t i e n t s having c l e f t l i p and pa la t e for
an
eva lua t ion concerning
f ea s ib i l i t y of pos te ropharyngea l f l ap in
a pa t i en t
o f
t h i s age group.
Concerning the
ex te rna l
rev i s ions , t h i s can be accomplished concerning
the
upper l i p , possib ly a t the same t ime
as
the f i s t u l a c losu re with
orll lcularis
r ed i rec t ion , a rev i s ion
of
the
n o s t r i l
sill
and
the
l a t e r a l
a l a r base , and a l so poss ib ly t i p rh inop las ty o r t h i s can
be accomplished a t
a
l a t e r
da te with
a
formal rh inoplas ty
in concer t
with other procedures . In addi t i on , the
vermi l ion border
should be
repai red . This can be
done by
Z-plas ty
technique.
The pa t i en t , t he re fore , wi l l be seen by the consul t an t s and
a
genera l p lan
with
t im i ng fo r
surgery ,
e t c . ,
w i l l
be
made.
We
wi l l
arrange to make
these
arrangements and fo l low-up with the pa t i en t .
No l e t t e r .
M.D.
econs t ruc t ive Surgery
JK:bsm
T--8/1 /85
D--7/23/85
ep
s1ak
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 17/19
BARKER,
RODEMS
COOK
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIAl lON
A
lTORNEYS
AT LAW
CHRIS A BARKER
Telephone 813/489·1001
300 West Platt Street, Suite
150
RYAN CHRISTOPHER RODEMS
Facsimile
813/489·1008
WILLIAM J COOK
Tampa, Florida 33606
March 27,2001
Neil 1 Gillespie
Apartment C-2
1121 Beach Drive
NE
St. Petersburg, Florida 33701-1434
Re: Vocational Rehabilitation
Dear Neil:
I am enclosing the material you provided to us. We have reviewed them and, unfortunately,
we are not in a position to represent you for any claims you may have. Please understand that our
decision does not mean that your claims lack merit, and another attorney might wish to represent you.
If you wish to consult with another attorney, we recommend that you do so immediately as a statute
oflimitations will apply to any claims you may have. As you know, a statute oflimitations is a legal
deadline for filing a lawsuit. Thank you for the opportunity to review your materials.
William 1
Cook
WJC mss
Enclosures
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 18/19
Neil
J
illespie
1121 Beach Drive NE, Apt. C-2
St. Petersburg, Florida 33701-1434
Telephone and Fax: (727) 823-2390
March 22, 2001
William
1
Cook, Attorney at
Law
Barker, Rodems Cook, PA
300 West Platt Street, Suite 150
Tampa, Florida 33606
Dear Bill,
Thank you for agreeing
to
consider my claim
of
discrimination/negligence against
the State of Florida and its Vocational Rehabilitation Program. Enclosed please find the
following:
1 My
Second nd Third
(final)
Amended Petitions for Administrative Hearing
These documents set forth much of my claim.
2. My Motionfor Summary Final Order The Administrative Law Judge (Johnston)
failed
to
rule on my motion. The
state s
response was
to
try and expand the issues and
compel another psychiatric exam. Seeing this was going nowhere, I motioned to
withdrawal the request. (See my motion, the order and
final
order, enclosed).
3. October 5, 1998 letter from Douglas Ligibel, Fla. DVR. This addendum letter
sets forth the
state s
claim that I was
not
cooperative as a reason to deny services.
4. Binder with the Fla. Vocational Rehabilitation web site printed out. (not current)
5 Photo of me taken June 6, 1994 (at 150 pounds) before afilicted with depression
(current weight 290 pounds).
6. A briefmedical history relevant
to VR.
In essence, the state discriminated against me based on disability and refused
services as set forth in the petitions.
As
a result I became severely depressed. The state is
negligent because its own psychologist (Dr. Justice) warned of my depression risk, a
warning the state ignored. The state also misdiagnosed my condition(s). There may be a
breach ofprivacy relevant to my file. During the time referenced by Mr. Ligibel in his
October 5, 1998 letter (item 3, above) my contact with the state was monitored by a
private lawyer, Mark Kamleiter, who disputes the allegations contained therein.
N e ~ f : ~ ~
en
o s u r ~ i
t
Ps. Bill, these are mostly original documents, please copy and return needed. Thanks.
8/11/2019 Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time Petitioner's Request to Toll Time, SC14-1637
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/petitioners-motion-to-extend-time-petitioners-request-to-toll-time 19/19
Neil Gillespie
From: "John A. Tomasino" <tomasino@flcourts.org>To: "'Neil Gillespie'" <neilgillespie@mfi.net>Cc: "Tad David" <davidt@flcourts.org>Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 8:50 AMSubject: RE: Supreme Court Case SC14-1637
Page 1 of 1
Mr. Gillespie,
In the second to last paragraph of your first attachment, you make references to SC14-1637,
and appear to be making requests regarding that case. I’m unsure if you intend your email
to serve as an official request, so I wanted to explain that any requests related to SC14-1637
must be made through a proper filing. There are three ways to file on a case: 1) By carrier
delivery; 2) by hand delivery; and/or 3) by filing through the E-Filing Portal.
Our office
cannot accept case related filings via email. You may register for an account at this website:
https://www.myflcourtaccess.com/default.aspx
Your email received on Tuesday, September 26, 2014, and four attachments will be placed in
our miscellaneous file and no action will be taken on those items.
From Neil Gillespie [mailto:neilgillespie@mfi.net]
Sent Tuesday, August 26, 2014 7:04 PM
To John A. Tomasino; Jack Harkness; Tad David
c Paul Hill; John Thomas Berry; Jack Harkness; Gregory W. Coleman; Adria E Quintela;
Ramon A. Abadin; Neil Gillespie
Subject Supreme Court Case SC14-1637
F
top related