Notice of CM-ECF Prohibition by The District Court

-------------
-_......-- .......
TATESCOURTOFAPPEALS
ELEVENTHCIRCUIT
APPEALNO.: 12-11213-C
Appellants/Plaintiffs,
vs. APPEALNO.: 12-11028-B
THIRTEENTHJUDICALCIRCUIT,
FLORIDA,etal.
Respondents/Defendants.
/
CONSOLIDATEDNOTICEOFPROSE
ELECTRONICCASEFILINGPROHffiITIONBYDISTRICTCOURT
In support ofDisability Accommodation and IFP Fee Waiver
I. Appellants,NEILJ. GILLESPIE("Gillespie")andESTATEOFPENELOPE
GILLESPIE,givenoticeofelectronicfiling(e-filing)prohibitionintheDistrictCourt,
whichcostGillespienotlessthan$1,094.94,and 178.5hourslabor.TheDistrictCourt
requiresproselitigantstofilepaperdocumentswiththeCourt,anddoesnotpermitpro
see-filingwithoutauthorization,butthereisnoprocedureforobtainingauthorization.
ThispracticebytheDistrictCourtisunconstitutionalassetforth inthisnotice.
2. ThisCourtdismissedGillespie'sappealno. 12-11028-BonJuly 13,2012for
failuretopayfilinganddocketingfees. TheextracostofpaperfilingtoGillespieisnot
lessthan$1,094.94.Thismoneycouldhavebeenusedtopaythefees. Gillespieis
indigentand/orinsolvent.ThisCourtgaveGillespienoticeJuly 16,2012inappealno.
1.2-11213-CthatpursuanttoEleventhCircuitRule42-1 (b)itwilldismisstheappeal
unless he pays $455 to the District Court. Gillespie is indigent and/or insolvent and
cannot pay the fee. The extra cost of paper filing to Gillespie of not less than $1,094.94
represents money that could have been used to pay the fees.
3. The additional time required of a pro se litigant for paper-only filing is a burden.
This burden is especially onerous to the disabled. Gillespie is disabled. Gillespie spent
not less than 178.5 hours filing paper documents. The time saved by e-filing would have
allowed Gillespie to make better pleadings. This extra time burden is unconstitutional.
PACER and CM/ECF
4. Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) is an electronic public
access service that allows users to obtain case and docket information from federal
appellate, district and bankruptcy courts, and the PACER Case Locator via the Internet.
PACER is provided by the federal J udiciary in keeping with its commitment to providing
public access to court information via a centralized service. See http://www.pacer.gov/
5. The Case Management/Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) system is the Federal
J udiciary's comprehensive case management system for all bankruptcy, district and
appellate courts. CM/ECF allows courts to accept filings and provide access to filed
documents over the Internet. See http://www.pacer.gov/cmecf/ (Exhibit 1).
CM/ECF keeps out-of-pocket expenses low, gives concurrent access to case files
by multiple parties, and offers expanded search and reporting capabilities. The system
also offers the ability to: immediately update dockets and make them available to users,
file pleadings electronically with the court, and download documents and print them
directly from the court system. See http://www.pacer.gov/cmecf/ (Exhibit 1)
CM/ECF Policy in the U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida
6. The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida filed a
CM/ECF Administrative Procedures Order, No. 6:07-MC-0027-ORL-19, by Chief J udge
Patricia C. Fawsett, signed February 28, 2007. (Exhibit 2). The Order states that
electronic filing is mandatory:
I(A) EFFECTIVE DATE
Electronic filing is mandatory, unless otherwise permitted by these administrative
procedures, by a general order of the Court, or by authorization of the J udge;. All
documents filed in Civil and Criminal cases in this District on or after J uly 12,
2004, no matter when a case was originally filed, shall be filed electronically.
The Courts CM/ECF Order requires pro se to file in paper format unless authorized to
file electronically, but provides no information on how to obtain such authorization:
III(C) PRO SE FILER
Unless authorized to file electronically, a pro se filer shall file any pleading and
other paper in paper format. The Clerk will scan and file these papers
electronically and will also maintain a paper file of such documents. If authorized
by the assigned J udge, a party proceeding pro se may file electronically. If
authorized to file electronically, the pro se filer must follow these procedures.
7. The Middle Districts CM/ECF Order is discriminatory on its face to pro se filers,
and contrary to PACERs mandate - Public Access to Court Electronic Records. The
Courts Order violates the Constitutionally protected rights of pro se filers as follows:
First Amendment, Pro se free speech, pro se right to petition for a governmental
redress of grievances, in the customary manner;
Fifth Amendment, depravation of liberty to pro se filers to file electronically;
Eighth Amendment, prohibition from excessive fines; the excessive cost to pro se
filers to make, transport, and mail or serve by courier paper filings to the Court;
Ninth and Tenth Amendments, the Constitution does not prohibit pro se electronic
filing, so that right is retained by the people;
Fourteenth Amendment, the due process clause, and the equal protection clause.
8. Gillespie submitted October 1, 2010 Plaintiffs Motion to File Electronically in
Gillespie v. The Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, Florida, et al., case no. 5:10-cv-503-oc-
WTH-DAB, U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, Ocala Division. (Doc. 6)
(Exhibit 3). The motion was brief, at the suggestion of personnel in the Clerks office:
Pursuant to local Rule 1.0t(a) Plaintiff pro se Gillespie moves to file documents
electronically in this lawsuit.
The Courts CM/ECF Order, described above in paragraph 6, and attached as Exhibit 2,
does not provide further instruction on obtaining pro se e-filing authorization.
9. U.S. Magistrate J udge David A. Barker Denied by Order (Doc. 17) October 24,
2010, Gillespies motion to e-file. (Exhibit 4). The Court held:
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs Motion To File Electronically (Doc. No.
6). Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, seeks leave to file documents
electronically in this action. Pro se litigants, however, are generally not permitted
access to the Courts Case Management and Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF)
system unless extenuating circumstances exist. Because Plaintiff has failed to
state any reason why he needs access to the CM/ECF system, Plaintiffs Motion
To File Electronically (Doc. No. 6) is DENIED.
The Courts Order does not give Gillespie leave to amend his motion, or show cause of
extenuating circumstances, or any other reason to e-file. However it should be obvious
that a pro se litigant would want to e-file for the same reasons that attorneys e-file:
CM/ECF keeps out-of-pocket expenses low, gives concurrent access to case files
by multiple parties, and offers expanded search and reporting capabilities. The
system also offers the ability to: immediately update dockets and make them
available to users, file pleadings electronically with the court, and download
documents and print them directly from the court system.
$811.48 Additional Cost of Paper Filing in Case No. 5:10-cv-503-oc-WTH-DAB
130.5 Additional Hours Time Spent Filing Paper in Case No. 5:10-cv-503-oc-WTH-DAB
10. a. Gillespie estimates that he incurred not less than $811.48 in additional expenses
in case no. 5:10-cv-503 because the Court denied his motion to e-file. Gillespie resides
13.9 miles from the Court, according to Google Maps. (Exhibit 5). A round trip is 27.8
miles. To file paper documents with the Court, Gillespie must either hand deliver the
documents to the Court, or drive to the post office and mail the documents, or hire a
courier service to deliver the documents to the Court. Each of these options are costly and
time consuming, but hand delivery appears to be the most efficient.
b. Gillespie believes he made not less than 31 round trips in his vehicle to file
paper documents, which amounts to not less than 861.8 miles. At least 9 trips were made
in 2010, at least seventeen 17 trips made in 2011, and at least 5 trips in 2012.
c. Gillespie estimates his mileage cost for filing paper documents at $461.48. The
standard business mileage rate set by the Internal Revenue Service in 2010 was 50 cents
per mile; in 2011 the rate was 55.5 cents per mile; in 2012 the rate is 55.5 cents per mile.
2010: 9 trips x 27.8 miles each =250.20 miles x $0.50 =$125.10
2012: 5 trips x 27.8 miles each =139 miles x $0.55 =$76.45
Total mileage costs: $461.48
d. Gillespie estimates his postage cost at $150 for filing and serving paper
documents by mail. While relatively few paper documents were mailed to the court, there
was postage to serve copies to the parties, as well as to mail Rule 4(d) waivers of service.
e. Gillespie estimates his paper and printing cost at $200 for filing and serving
paper documents by mail, for paper, envelopes, ink, toner, and drum cartridges, etc.
Total for postage and supplies: $350.00
Total costs to file paper in case no. 5:10-cv-503-oc-WTH-DAB: $811.48
11. Gillespie spent at least 46.5 hours driving to the Court to file paper documents.
Google maps estimates about 28 minutes to drive from Gillespies residence to the Court.
(Exhibit 5). A round trip is 56 minutes. Additional time is needed to park, walk to the
Court building, pass through security, ride the elevator to the third floor, and file paper
documents with a deputy clerk. The entire process takes about 1.5 hours. Gillespie made
not less than 31 trips to the Court, and expended about 46.5 hours - over a weeks work.
(31 trips x 1.5 hours =46.5 hours). In addition, for items filed in paper, approximately
two hours average additional time is needed to print and assemble paper documents for
hand delivery to the Court, and more time to prepare documents for mailing to the Court,
or to serve paper documents by mail on parties. (42 filings x 2 hours =84 hours).
Gillespie believes that two hours is a conservative estimate of the time needed to
physically assemble, and prepare for hand delivery or mailing, paper documents to the
court. Simple filings take less time, and larger paper filings take much longer to prepare.
Total time to file paper in case no. 5:10-cv-503-oc-WTH-DAB: 130.5 hours. (46.5 +84).
$283.46 Additional Cost of Paper Filing in Case No. 5:11-cv-539-oc-WTH-TBS
48 Additional Hours of Time Spent Filing Paper in Case No. 5:11-cv-539-oc-WTH-TBS
12. a. Gillespie estimates that he incurred not less than $283.46 in additional expenses
in case no. 5:11-cv-539 because he was not authorized to e-file. Gillespie estimates his
mileage cost for filing paper documents at $183.46:
Total mileage costs: $183.48.
b. Gillespie estimates his postage cost at $25 for serving paper documents by
mail. While no paper documents were mailed to the court in this case, there was postage
to serve copies on the parties, and to mail Rule 4(d) waivers of service to parties.
c. Gillespie estimates his paper and printing cost at $75 for filing and serving
paper documents, for paper, envelopes, ink, toner, and drum cartridges, etc.
Total for postage and supplies: $100.
Total costs to file paper in case no. 5:11-cv-539-oc-WTH-TBS: $283.48.
13. Gillespie spent not less than 18 hours driving to the Court to file paper
documents. As described in paragraph 11, the entire process takes about 1.5 hours.
Gillespie made not less than 12 trips to the Court. (12 trips x 1.5 hours =18 hours). For
items filed in paper, approximately two hours average additional time is needed to print
and assemble paper documents for hand delivery to the Court, and more time to prepare
documents for service by mail to parties. (15 filings x 2 hours =30 hours).
Total time to file paper in case no. 5:11-cv-539-oc-WTH-TBS: 48 hours. (18 +30).
Combined Totals for Additional Costs and Time
14. Combined totals calculated as follows:
Total costs to file paper in case no. 5:10-cv-503-oc-WTH-DAB: $811.48.
Total costs to file paper in case no. 5:11-cv-539-oc-WTH-TBS: $283.48.
Combined total costs to file paper in both cases: $1,094.96.
Total time to file paper in case no. 5:10-cv-503-oc-WTH-DAB: 130.5 hours.
Total time to file paper in case no. 5:11-cv-539-oc-WTH-TBS: 48 hours.
Combined time to file paper in both cases: 178.50 hours.
Seven (7) Hour Time Advantage with Electronic Case Filing in District Court
15. There is a seven (7) hour time advantage to e-filing within the same time zone.
The Ocala Clerks offices closes at 4:00 p.m., with after-hours drop off until 5:00 p.m.
Those authorized to e-file have until midnight.
FRCP, Rule 6. Computing and Extending Time; Time for Motion Papers
Rule 6(a)(4) Last Day Defined. Unless a different time is set by a
statute, local rule, or court order, the last day ends:
(A) for electronic filing, at midnight in the court's time zone; and
(B) for filing by other means, when the clerk's office is scheduled to close.
E-Filing as a Disability Accommodation
16. Gillespies motion to e-file is a reasonable disability accommodation request.
a. Gillespies disability request submitted to the District Court September 28,
2010 in case no. 5:10-cv-503, and resubmitted publicly in Plaintiff Neil J. Gillespies
Notice of Filing Verified Notice of Filing Disability Information of Neil J. Gillespie
(Doc. 36) , Exhibit 2, page 17, states as follows:
ADA Request No.6: Mr. Gillespie requests time to scan thousands of pages of
documents in this case to electronic PDF format. This case and underlying cause
of action covers a ten year period and the files have become unmanageable and
confusing relative to Gillespie's disability. Mr. Gillespie is not able to concentrate
when handling a large amount of physical files and documents. He is better able
to manage the files and documents when they are organized and viewable on his
computer. Mr. Gillespie will bear the cost of converting files and documents to
PDF. (Doc. 36, Page 47 of 62 Page ID 803).
Gillespies disability notice to the Court (Doc. 36) shows Depression, Post Traumatic
Stress Disorder, Diabetes Type II Adult Onset, Traumatic Brain Injury, and
Velopharyngeal Incompetence.
b. The notice shows that Since March 3, 2006, Ryan Christopher Rodems,
counsel for the Defendants, has directed, with malice aforethought, a course of harassing
conduct toward Gillespie that has aggravated his disability, caused substantial emotional
distress and serves no legitimate purposeGillespie is disabled, and Mr. Rodems knows
of Gillespie's disability from Defendants' prior representation of him. (Doc. 36, Page 1
of 62 Page ID 757). The notice shows in paragraph 3 a statement on the record by
Gillespies former attorney Robert W. Bauer about Mr. Rodems:
3. Mr. Rodems has set a level of animosity in this lawsuit best described by
Gillespies former attorney Robert W. Bauer August 14, 2008 during an
Emergency Hearing on garnishment before J udge Marva Crenshaw (p16, line 24):
24 Mr. Rodems has, you know, decided to take a full
25 nuclear blast approach instead of us trying to work
1 this out in a professional manner. It is my
2 mistake for sitting back and giving him the
3 opportunity to take this full blast attack.
Mr. Rodems' "full nuclear blast approach" has aggravated Gillespie's disability to
the point where Gillespie can no longer represent himself at hearings. Gillespie
becomes easily distracted and confused, and can no longer speak coherently
enough during a hearing to represent himself. See Plaintiffs Motion For
Appointment Of Counsel, ADA Accommodation Request, and Memorandum of
Law filed May 24, 2011.
(Doc. 36, Page 2 of 62 Page ID 758)
c. The Complaint (Doc. 1) shows Florida attorney Seldon J . Childers estimated on
September 17, 2009 the non-pecuniary cost of this litigation to Gillespie at $100,000 for
physical and emotional ill effects resulting from the litigation. (Doc. 1, 135, page 39).
d. A study by the World Health Organisation shows depression is more damaging
to everyday health than chronic diseases such as angina, arthritis, asthma and diabetes.
Researchers found if people are ill with other conditions, depression makes them worse.
Somnath Chatterji of the World Health Organisation led the study. The most disabling
combination was diabetes and depression, the researchers said. "If you live for one year
with diabetes and depression together you are living the equivalent of 60 percent of full
health," Chatterji said in a telephone interview. News of this study was reported by
Reuters on September 7, 2007. (Exhibit 6). The study is reported in the Lancet Medical
J ournal, Vol. 370 No. 9590 pp 851-858. (Exhibit 7).
e. Gillespies ability to perform the kinds of tasks need in this lawsuit, such as
reading and handling documents, has declined further since ADA Request No. 6 was
initially submitted to the state court in February 2010. Gillespies concentration and
short-term memory have declined, and he becomes confused when handling numbers of
physical files and documents. He able to manage PDF files and documents when they are
organized and viewable on his computer. The computer screen helps Gillespie maintain
his concentration. When he looks away from the computer screen to perform manual
tasks, such as looking in a file drawer for a pleading, he often forgets the purpose of the
task. As such, authorization to e-file is a reasonable disability accommodation.
District Clerk Failed to Comply With CM/ECF Administrative Procedures Order
17. As set forth in Gillespies letter to District Clerk Sheryl L. Loesch dated April 5,
2012 (Exhibit 8), the Clerk failed to file on PACER Exhibits 1-15 to Gillespies
Complaint (Doc. 1) in case no. 5:10-cv-503-oc-WTH-DAB. Gillespie provided paper
copies to the Clerk for e-filing as required by CM/ECF Administrative Procedures Order,
No. 6:07-MC-0027-ORL-19: (Exhibit 3)
III(C) PRO SE FILER
electronically and will also maintain a paper file of such documents.
However the Clerk failed to comply with the Order which required the Clerk to scan and
file these papers electronically. Gillespie notified the District Clerk Loesch of multiple
failures by the Clerk, but has not received any response to his letter. (Exhibit 8). Had
Gillespie been authorized to e-file, he could have corrected these mistakes by the Clerk:
THE CLERK FAILED TO PUT VITAL DOCUMENTS ON CM/ECF AND
PACER
2. The Clerk failed to put vital documents I filed in this case on the Case
Management and Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) system to view on PACER.
One such document is Doc. 2, Exhibits 1-15 to the Complaint (Doc. 1) filed
September 28, 2010 when I personally commenced the case in the Ocala Division
and hand-delivered the complaint and exhibits to a deputy clerk.
Doc. 2, Exhibit 4 is my Emergency Motion To Disqualify Defendants Counsel
Ryan Christopher Rodems & Baker, Rodems & Cook, PA submitted J uly 9, 2010
in the state court action; in this Court the motion is Doc. 2, Exhibit 4 to the
Complaint (Doc. 1), but not viewable on PACER. This negatively affected my
case because Magistrate J udge David Baker, who is located in Orlando, could not
view the document located in Ocala when he made rulings in the case. The
document was only viewable in person in Ocala, or by request to send the
physical file to Orlando. There is no evidence that the physical file was sent to
Orlando.
I brought this issue to the attention of Chief J udge Anne Conway by letter dated
March 22, 2012, see Doc. 68, Motion To Amend The J udgment, the letter is
attached as an exhibit to the motion, and contains 33 pages; a three page letter to
Chief J udge Conway and 30 pages of enclosures.
PRE-LITIGATION COMMUNICATION WITH J AMES LEANHEART
3. Prior to personally filing this pro se case, I wrote August 30, 2010 to
J ames Leanheart, Court Operations Supervisor, about filing documents on the
CM/ECF system and PACER. This is the operative language from paragraph five
of the accompanying letter: (Exhibit 2)
Myclaimsinvolve documents in the state court record from the
Circuit Civil Court of the 13th J udicial Circuit, includingan amended
complaint (150 pages), and an emergency motion to disqualify counsel
(190 pages). What is the procedure for including or incorporating these
numerous and sometimes large documents into mycivil rights
complaint?
Mr. Leanheart did not respond in writing, but we spoke by phone September 10,
2010. Following Mr. Leanhearts instructions, I filed all the documents in paper
September 28, 2010. I personally filed the case September 28, 2010 and
personally handed the paper documents to a deputy clerk. But the Clerk did not
put any of the exhibits on the CM/ECF system and/or PACER, not the amended
complaint (Exhibit 3), not the emergency motion to disqualify counsel (Exhibit
4), none of the 15 exhibits were put on PACER. I complained to the deputy clerks
in Ocala more than once to no avail. I complained in person a number of times
and the error was not corrected. I live in Ocala and almost always hand deliver
my documents to a deputy clerk in order to save the cost of postage or courier
service as I am indigent.
My letter dated August 30, 2010 to Mr. Leanheart states I planned to file a pro se
lawsuit in two weeks or so, but I was delayed until September 28, 2010 due to
mental illness and other disabilities, see Doc. 36 for my notice of filing disability
information.
INCORRECT DATE/TIME STAMP ON COMPLAINT BY CLERK
8. The Clerks date/time stamp shows the Complaint (Doc. 1) was filed
2010 SEP 28 AM 7:47 which time is incorrect. The Court does not open until
8:30 AM, and I filed the Complaint myself in person by handing the Complaint
directly to a deputy clerk about 8:47 AM.
INCORRECT PLAINITFF ADDRESS BY CLERK OF COURT
9. The Clerk used an incorrect mailing address for me, necessitating a
corrective motion, see Plaintiffs Motion to Correct Mailing Address, filed
October 5, 2010. (Doc. 9). My correct address is listed on the complaint and every
document filed in this case. My address has not changed since 2005. The motion
states as follows:
Plaintiff pro se Gillespie moves Court to correct his mailing address:
1. The Court is sending Plaintiff Gillespie's mail to the wrong
address. Please use the correct address, listed on the complaint: 8092 SW
I15th Loop, Ocala, Florida 34481.
INCORRECT PLAINITFF PHONE NUMBER BY CLERK OF COURT
10. The Clerk used an incorrect telephone number for me, necessitating a
corrective motion, see Plaintiffs Motion to Correct Phone Number, filed October
13, 2010. (Doc. 15). My correct phone number is listed on the complaint and
every document filed in this case. My home phone number has not changed since
2005. The motion states as follows:
Plaintiff pro se Gillespie moves the Court to correct his phone number
and states:
1. The PACER docket shows an incorrect phone number for Plaintiff pro
se Gillespie. The correct phone number is listed on the complaint: (352)
854-7807.
Gillespie believes the Clerks failure to comply with the Courts CM/ECF Order and scan
and file electronically his paper documents is a violation of due process.
Other U.S. District Courts Offer Online Pro Se E-filing Registration and Instruction
18. The United States District Court for the Northern District of California offers
online e-filing registration instructions for pro se litigants, found at this URL:
http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/ECF/proseregistration
1. A computer, the internet, and email on a daily basis so you can e-file your
documents and receive notifications from the Court.
2. A scanner to scan documents that are only in paper format (like exhibits).
3. A printer/copier because each documents that you e-file will also need to be
sent to the judge in hard copy (the judges copy is called the chambers copy).
4. A word-processing program to create your documents.
5. A .pdf reader and a .pdf writer, which enables you to convert word processing
documents into .pdf format. Only .pdf documents are accepted for e-filing. Adobe
Acrobat is the most common program used. The reader (Adobe Acrobat Reader)
is free, but the writer is not. Some word processing programs come with a .pdf
writer already installed.
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California offers an online
pro se ECF Registration form in active PDF format.
Gillespie PACER Account In Good Standing Since 1999
19. Gillespie has maintained a PACER account in good standing since December 22,
1999, thereby demonstrating his ability to competently handle the account. (Exhibit 9).
Gillespie meets the technical requirements for e-filing set forth by the U.S. District Court
for the N.D. of California shown in paragraph 17, and on the Courts website.
Cost to File Paper Documents in the U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals
20. Gillespie incurred time and costs filing paper documents in this Court. The
Eleventh Circuit, located in Atlanta, Georgia, is 376 miles from Gillespies home in
Ocala, Florida, according to Google Maps. A round trip is 752 miles. This distance
requires Gillespie to submit paper documents to this Court by mail or by courier at
considerable expense. There is also a time delay in serving documents by mail or courier,
as compared to filing documents personally by hand delivery to the Court.
uer, et .
CONCLUSION
21. The District Court's denial of Gillespie's motion to e-file denied him equal rights
with all the other parties in this case, all of whom could e-file pleadings and documents
from the comfort of their office or home at little or no extra expense. For the reasons set
forth in this notice, Gillespie was wrongfully denied authorization to e-file in the u.S.
District Court, Middle District of Florida, contrary to the First, Fifth, Ninth, Tenth, and
Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, and suffered damages of not less than
$1,094.94, and sustained the loss of not less than 178.5 hours of labor. This time and
money could have been better spent on G-illespie's actions in the U.S. District Court, and
the payment of fees in this Appellate Court, as well as expenses in his state court actions,
and was a significant factor in the negative outcomes of those actions, thereby creating
new additional Constitutional and other grounds for redress.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED July 27, 2012..
Certificate of Service
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing was provided July 27, 2012 by
email onlytoCatherineBarbaraChapman(catherine@guildaylaw.com).Guilday.
Tucker, Schwartz & Simpson, P.A. 1983 Centre Pointe Bo vard, Suite 200.
Tallahassee, FL 32308-7823, counsel for Robert W.
(------
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
NEIL J . GILLESPIE,
ESTATE OF PENELOPE GILLESPIE,
APPEAL NO.: 12-11213-C
Appellants/Plaintiffs,
vs. APPEAL NO.: 12-11028-B
THIRTEENTH J UDICAL CIRCUIT,
FLORIDA, et al.
Respondents/Defendants.
_______________________________/
APPENDIX
CONSOLIDATED NOTICE OF PRO SE
ELECTRONIC CASE FILING PROHIBITION BY DISTRICT COURT
In support of Disability Accommodation and IFP Fee Waiver
Exhibit 1 Case Management/Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) information
Exhibit 2 CM/ECF Administrative Procedures Order, No. 6:07-MC-0027-ORL-19
Exhibit 3 Plaintiffs Motion to File Electronically, Case 5:10-cv-00503 (Doc. 6)
Exhibit 4 Order, Denied - Plaintiffs Motion to File Electronically (Doc. 17)
Exhibit 5 Google Maps, mileage and driving time to District Court, Ocala Division
Exhibit 6 Reuters: Depression more damaging than some chronic illnesses
Exhibit 7 Lancet Medical J ournal, Vol. 370 No. 9590 pp 851-858, WHO study
Exhibit 8 Letter to District Clerk Sheryl L. Loesch, April 5, 2012
Exhibit 9 PACER welcome letter to Gillespie, December 22, 1999 (Redacted)
Manage My PACER Account
| Manage My Appellate Filer Account
| Case Search Sign In

HOME
REGISTER
FIND A CASE
E-FILE
QUICK LINKS
HELP
CONTACT US
Login
RSS

E-FILE
Appellate Courts
District / Bankruptcy Courts
CM/ECF Help Desk Numbers
Local Court CM/ECF Information
CM/ECF FAQs
Training
Release Notes
Resources
Developers
Manage My Appellate Filer Account
The Case Management/Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) systemis the Federal Judiciary's comprehensive case management systemfor all bankruptcy,
district and appellate courts. CM/ECF allows courts to accept filings and provide access to filed documents over the Internet.
CM/ECF keeps out-of-pocket expenses low, gives concurrent access to case files by multiple parties, and offers expanded search and reporting
capabilities. The systemalso offers the ability to: immediately update dockets and make themavailable to users, file pleadings electronically with the
court, and download documents and print themdirectly fromthe court system.
If you already have a filer account and are looking for a link to file, check our Court Links page.

Contact Us | Privacy | Policies and Procedures | About Us
This site is maintained by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, PACER Service Center.
The purpose of this site is to provide information about locating and filing cases in U.S. federal courts.

Public Access to Court Electronic Records http://www.pacer.gov/cmecf/
1 of 1 7/24/2012 2:43 PM
1
FILED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
2007FES 28 M 110: 12
Miscellaneous Case i~Bt(; lb!~4'~R&~~~7-0 fLL-[
'i
~.J!1LP.hLU, ;-
L
In Re: Administrative Procedures for
Electronic Filing in Civil and
Criminal Cases
/
Upon Consideration, effective March 15,2007, Administrative Procedures I(A), I(B)(3-
6), I(D)(1), II(A)(1)(a), II(A)(I)(c), II(A)(7), II(I)(6), III(C), IV(A)(1), and IV(B) shall be
amended1 as follows:
I(A) EFFECTIVE DATE
Electronic filing is mandatory, unless otherwise permitted by these administrative
procedures, by a general order of the Court, or by authorization of the Judge;. All
documents filed in Civil and Criminal cases in this District on or after July 12,
2004, no matter when a case was originally filed, shall be filed electronically.
I(B)(3-6) OFFICIAL RECORD
,.,
:J. PIO Sc file!. A patty plOcccding plO 5Cmay file clcettonieally if
autllolized by tk a5signcd Judgc. If authoIizcd, the pro 5Cparty 1l1U5t
folloV\>the5e plOccdule5. Al50 5ee Paldf;!aph III C ofthe5c ploccdu1(~5.
473. Social Securitv Case: A Social Security case is governed by paragraph III
D of these procedures.
5:4. Sealed Document: A document filed under seal will be maintained in
paper format and will not be filed electronically unless the assigned Judge
orders the document unsealed. Also see paragraphs III A and B of these
procedures.
6:5. Original Transcript: The original transcript of an official court proceeding
in the Middle District of Florida when filed by the official court reporter or
a contract court reporter of the Court shall be filed in paper format.
lRedlined language is new. A line is drawn through language to be stricken from the present version of the
Administrative Procedures.
2
I(D)(l) LOGIN AND PASSWORD
Attorneys Admitted to Practice in this Court: Upon a proper request, the Clerk
shall assign one login and password to each attorney admitted to practice and in
good standing in the Middle District or specially admitted pursuant to Local Rule
2.02(a)ft). To request a login and password from the Clerk, an attorney must
complete and return to the Clerk an "Electronic Filing Registration Form." The
form appears on the Court's web site at www.f1md.uscourts.gOV,is available in
the clerk's office, and is attached to this policy. The Clerk will serve the
attorney's login and password on the attorney using the attorney's e-mail address
or by first-class mail unless the attorney arranges receipt by other means agreeable
to the Clerk. The assigned login and password enable the attorney to retrieve and
file a document electronically and to receive a notice of electronic filing.
II(A)(l)(a) FILING
Electronic filing is mandatory. Any document in a case shall be filed
electronically except as otherwise provided by these procedures or by court order.
II(A)(l)(c) FILING
A document which exceeds tvvofive megabytes must be filed in components each
of which must not exceed twer five megabytes.
II(A)(7) FILING
If filing a document requires leave of Court (e.g., an amended complaint, reply
brief, etc.), the filer shall attach the proposed document to the motion as an exhibit
(except as provided in Local Rule 3.01(d)). If the Court grants the motion, the
filer may file the document electronically.
11(1)(6) PRIVACY PROTECTION
Waiver of Protection of Identifiers:
A party waives the protection as to the party's own information to the extent that
the party files such information not under seal and without redaction. The Clerk
will not review each filing for redaction.
III(C) PRO SE FILER
electronically and will also maintain a paper file of such documents. If authorized
by the assigned Judge, a party proceeding pro se may file electronically. If
authorized to file electronically, the pro se filer must follow these procedures.
IV(A)(l) EXHIBIT ATTACHED TO DOCUMENT
Size Limitation: Except as otherwise provided in these procedures, a filer shall
electronically image, i.e., "scan," a paper exhibit filed as an attachment to a
document that is less than twt)' five megabytes and submit the exhibit as a .pdf file.
IV(B) VOLUMINOUS EXHIBIT
If the exhibit attached to any particular document is twt)' five megabytes or more,
the document and exhibit must be filed according to the following procedure:
1. Index: A filer must prepare an exhibit index and file the index as
an attachment to the main document.
2. Separate Attachment: Each separate exhibit must be filed as a
separate attachment to the main document.
3. Size Limitation: If an exhibit exceeds twt)' five megabytes, that
exhibit must be separated into components of twt)' five megabytes
or less, and each component of the exhibit must be filed as a
separate attachment to the main document.
DONE AND ORDERED this ~
of
,2007.
Patricia C. Fawsett
Chief United States Distri t Judge
Case 5:10-cv-00503-WTH-DAB Document 6 Filed 10/01/10 Page 1 of 1
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
OCALA DIVISION
NEIL J. GILLESPIE,
Plaintiff,
-vs- Case No. 5:10-cv-503-Oc-10DAB
THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT,
FLORIDA, et al.,
Defendants.
______________________________________
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs Motion To File Electronically (Doc. No. 6). Plaintiff,
who is proceeding pro se, seeks leave to file documents electronically in this action. Pro se litigants,
however, are generally not permitted access to the Courts Case Management and Electronic Case
Filing (CM/ECF) system unless extenuating circumstances exist. Because Plaintiff has failed to
state any reason why he needs access to the CM/ECF system, Plaintiffs Motion To File Electronically
(Doc. No. 6) is DENIED.
Plaintiffs Motion for Extension of Time (Doc. No. 14) is GRANTED.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Orlando, Florida on October 14, 2010.
David A. Baker
DAVID A. BAKER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE J UDGE
Copies furnished to:
Pro Se Plaintiff
Counsel of Record
Case 5:10-cv-00503-WTH-DAB Document 17 Filed 10/14/10 Page 1 of 1
4
Directions to 207 NW 2nd St, Ocala, FL 34475
13.9 mi about 28 mins
8092 SW 115th Loop, Ocala, FL 34481 to 207 NW 2nd St, Ocala, FL 344... http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=8092+Southwest...
1 of 2 7/20/2012 2:21 AM
5
These directions are for planning purposes only. You may find that construction projects, traffic, weather, or other events may cause conditions to
differ fromthe map results, and you should plan your route accordingly. You must obey all signs or notices regarding your route.
Map data 2012 Google
Directions weren't right? Please find your route on maps.google.comand click "Report a problem" at the bottomleft.
8092 SW 115th Loop, Ocala, FL 34481
1. Head west on SW 115th Loop
Restricted usage road
go 79 ft
total 79 ft
2. At the traffic circle, take the 1st exit onto SW 81st Ave
go 0.2 mi
total 0.2 mi
3. Turn left onto 115th St Rd
About 50 secs
go 0.2 mi
total 0.4 mi
4. Continue onto SW 110th St
About 4 mins
go 1.2 mi
total 1.5 mi
5. Turn right onto Florida 200
About 19 mins
go 11.6 mi
total 13.1 mi
6. Turn left onto S Pine Ave
About 3 mins
go 0.6 mi
total 13.8 mi
7. Turn right onto NW 2nd St
Destination will be on the left
go 410 ft
total 13.9 mi
207 NW 2nd St, Ocala, FL 34475
8092 SW 115th Loop, Ocala, FL 34481 to 207 NW 2nd St, Ocala, FL 344... http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=8092+Southwest...
2 of 2 7/20/2012 2:21 AM
Print
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to colleagues, clients or
customers, use the Reprints tool at the top of any article or visit: www.reutersreprints.com.
By Michael Kahn
LONDON (Reuters) - Depression is more damaging to everyday health than chronic diseases such as angina,
arthritis, asthma and diabetes, researchers said on Friday.
And if people are ill with other conditions, depression makes them worse, the researchers found.
"We report the largest population-based worldwide study to our knowledge that explores the effect of depression in comparison with four
other chronic diseases on health state," the researchers wrote in the Lancet medical journal.
Somnath Chatterji of the World Health Organisation, who led the study, said researchers calculated the impact of different conditions by
asking people questions about their capacities to function in everyday situations -- such as moving around, seeing things at a distance
and remembering information.
The researchers assigned a number between 0 and 100 reflecting a person's relative health score.
"Our main findings show that depression impairs health state to a substantially greater degree than the other diseases," the researchers
wrote.
The team used World Health Organisation data collected from 60 countries and more than 240,000 people to show on average between
9 percent and 23 percent had depression in addition to one or more of four other chronic diseases -- asthma, angina, arthritis and
diabetes.
The most disabling combination was diabetes and depression, the researchers said.
"If you live for one year with diabetes and depression together you are living the equivalent of 60 percent of full health," Chatterji said in a
telephone interview.
The findings show the need to provide better treatment for depression because it has such a big impact on people with chronic illnesses,
Chatterji added.
"What tends to happen is a health provider doesn't look for anything else but the chronic illness," he said.
"What we are saying is, these people will also be depressed and if you don't manage the depression you can't improve a person's health
because depression is actually worsening it."
Thomson Reuters 2011. All rights reserved. Users may download and print extracts of content from this website for their own personal
and non-commercial use only. Republication or redistribution of Thomson Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is
expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Thomson Reuters. Thomson Reuters and its logo are registered trademarks or
trademarks of the Thomson Reuters group of companies around the world.
Thomson Reuters journalists are subject to an Editorial Handbook which requires fair presentation and disclosure of relevant interests.
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to colleagues, clients or
customers, use the Reprints tool at the top of any article or visit: www.reutersreprints.com.
Fri, Sep 7 2007
Business & Financial News, Breaking US & International News | Reuters.com http://www.reuters.com/assets/print?aid=USL0683687520070907
1 of 1 5/24/2012 6:29 PM
6
Articles
www.thelancet.com Vol 370 September 8, 2007 851
Depression, chronic diseases, and decrements in health:
results from the World Health Surveys
Saba Moussavi, Somnath Chatterji, Emese Verdes, Ajay Tandon, Vikram Patel, Bedirhan Ustun
Summary
Background Depression is an important public-health problem, and one of the leading causes of disease burden
worldwide. Depression is often comorbid with other chronic diseases and can worsen their associated health
outcomes. Few studies have explored the eect of depression, alone or as a comorbidity, on overall health status.
Methods The WHO World Health Survey (WHS) studied adults aged 18 years and older to obtain data for health,
health-related outcomes, and their determinants. Prevalence of depression in respondents based on ICD-10 criteria
was estimated. Prevalence values for four chronic physical diseasesangina, arthritis, asthma, and diabeteswere
also estimated using algorithms derived via a Diagnostic Item Probability Study. Mean health scores were constructed
using factor analysis and compared across dierent disease states and demographic variables. The relation of these
disease states to mean health scores was determined through regression modelling.
Findings Observations were available for 245 404 participants from 60 countries in all regions of the world. Overall,
1-year prevalence for ICD-10 depressive episode alone was 32% (95% CI 3035); for angina 45% (4348); for
arthritis 41% (3843); for asthma 33% (2936); and for diabetes 20% (1822). An average of between 93%
and 230% of participants with one or more chronic physical disease had comorbid depression. This result was
signicantly higher than the likelihood of having depression in the absence of a chronic physical disease (p<00001).
After adjustment for socioeconomic factors and health conditions, depression had the largest eect on worsening
mean health scores compared with the other chronic conditions. Consistently across countries and dierent
demographic characteristics, respondents with depression comorbid with one or more chronic diseases had the worst
health scores of all the disease states.
Interpretation Depression produces the greatest decrement in health compared with the chronic diseases angina,
arthritis, asthma, and diabetes. The comorbid state of depression incrementally worsens health compared with
depression alone, with any of the chronic diseases alone, and with any combination of chronic diseases without
depression. These results indicate the urgency of addressing depression as a public-health priority to reduce disease
burden and disability, and to improve the overall health of populations.
Introduction
Depression is an important global public-health issue,
both because of the relatively high lifetime prevalence
ranging from 2% to 15% and because it is associated
with substantial disability.
1,2
Rated as the fourth leading
cause of disease burden in 2000, depression accounted
for 44% of total disability adjusted life years (DALYs).
3
It
is also responsible for the greatest proportion of disease
burden attributable to non-fatal health outcomes,
accounting for almost 12% of total years lived with
disability worldwide.
1
Without treatment, depression has
the tendency to assume a chronic course, be recurrent,
and over time to be associated with increasing
disability.
4,5
The comorbidity of depression with chronic physical
diseases such as arthritis and diabetes is well recognised
in developed countries.
69
Several studies have shown
that there is an increased risk of having major depression
in people with one or more chronic diseases.
7,10,11
The
degree to which these comorbid states exist at the global
level has not been shown. With a growing elderly
population, and the associated increase in prevalence of
chronic medical conditions, a concomitant rise in the
prevalence of depression is to be expected. In fact,
projections indicate that after heart disease, depression
is expected to become the second leading cause of
disease burden by the year 2020.
12

The increasing prevalence of chronic physical diseases
and depression leads to the question of how these
disorders compare in terms of their eect on overall
individual health. The presence of self-reported chronic
physical diseases such as angina, arthritis, asthma, and
diabetes has been associated with reduced health-related
quality of life scores.
1319
Lower health status has been
reported in depressed patients than in those without
depression, and this state is unequally distributed across
population groups.
7,13,2022
Eects of depressive episodes
have also been studied with regard to loss in productivity
and poor health-related quality of life.
13,21,2326
Despite this
evidence, depression, like other mental disorders, is
often not deemed to be on a par with other chronic
physical health conditions in terms of its eect on overall
health.
27,28
This view is perhaps one of the underlying
reasons behind the lack of parity between mental and
physical disorders in terms of access to health care.
6,2932

To our knowledge, there has been no worldwide
Lancet 2007; 370: 85158
See Comment page 808
See Perspectives page 821
Department of Measurement
and Health Information
Systems, World Health
Organization, Geneva,
Switzerland (S Moussavi MPH,
S Chatterji MD, E Verdes PhD,
B Ustun MD); Economics and
Research Department, Asian
Development Bank, Manila,
Philippines (A Tandon PhD);
and London School of Hygiene
and Tropical Medicine, London,
UK (Vikram Patel PhD)
Full list of collaborators at end of
the paper
Correspondence to:
Dr Somnath Chatterji,
Department of Measurement
and Health Information Systems,
World Health Organization,
Geneva 27, Switzerland
chatterjis@who.int
7
Articles
852 www.thelancet.com Vol 370 September 8, 2007
comparison of depression with other chronic diseases
and their eect, either individually or comorbid, on
health.
We analysed data from the WHO World Health Survey
(WHS) to address the following questions: how does the
decrement in health state associated with depression
compare with the decrement associated with other
common chronic physical conditions; and what is the
added eect on decrements in health of suering from
depression, over and above a chronic physical condition?
33

Methods
Sample
Countries from the WHS were selected to represent all
regions of the world, with 26 countries from the European
region, 15 from the African region, six from the Americas,
four from the eastern Mediterranean region, ve from
the southeast Asia region, and four from the western
Pacic region, giving a total of 60 countries. The countries
included in the survey programme represent those
countries that were willing and able to participate in the
survey. Countries with samples that were nationally
representative, probabilistically selected, and which had
sampling weights information available, were used in
the analysis for this paper. To adjust for the population
distribution as represented by the UN Statistical Division
and for non-response, post-stratication corrections were
made to the sampling weights
Procedures
All respondents used in the analysis were interviewed
with the standardised WHS survey, which included
questions on sociodemographic and economic factors, a
series of questions on health status, and questions related
to whether the individual had ever been diagnosed with
depression, asthma, arthritis, angina, and diabetes,
whether the person had ever received or was currently on
treatment for these conditions, and, with the exception of
diabetes, a series of symptom questions related to each
condition. All surveys were implemented as face-to-face
interviews with the exception of Luxembourg and Israel,
which were implemented as telephone interviews. All
questionnaires were translated and back-translated using
a standard WHO protocol. The quality of translations
was independently veried by bilingual experts before
eld implementation. Informed consent was obtained
from all respondents and the study was cleared by the
ethics review committees at each site.
The health state measure presented in this analysis was
developed by WHO based on its framework for measuring
health. WHO assesses an individuals state of health as a
vector of capacities in multiple domains.
34
For
measurement in surveys, this information needs to be
reduced to a parsimonious set of domains that are clearly
dened and measured with reliable self-report questions.
After an extensive review of existing survey questionnaires,
none were deemed able to match the exact ideas or have
the information needed to measure the distribution of
health in the general population. Hence, a new measure
was developed where the valuation could be estimatedie,
the relative disability weight assigned to dierent patterns
of the health states, thus allowing for cross-country
comparability.
The measure was based on 18 health-related questions,
where the responses were recorded on a ve point scale
ranging from no di culty or problem to extreme
di culty/inability. Two of the questions assessed
general health: one asking overall self-reported health,
and the other asking how much di culty the respondent
had in working or doing household activities during the
past 30 days. These two items were analysed individually.
The remaining 16 questions were grouped into the
following eight health domains: vision, mobility, self
care, cognition, interpersonal activities, pain and
discomfort, sleep and energy, and aect. These domains
are included in many commonly used health outcome
measures such as the Short Form 36 (SF36), the Health
Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI 3), and the Euroqol 5D.
3537

The health measure had been extensively tested as part
of a similar survey done between 2000 and 2001, the
Multi-Country Survey Study.
38
The internal consistency
of the health measure as assessed using Cronbachs
alpha was 091. The test-retest reliability of individual
items, measured by the weighted Kappa, ranged
from 048062. Missing data for individual items
ranged from 13% to 58%. Construct validity was also
assessed, and respondents who were older or had a
chronic condition reported worse health, whereas
respondents with higher socioeconomic status and
countries with higher life expectancies on average
reported better health.
38
A composite health status score was derived from the
16 self-reported health questions. Since the item
responses were based on a ve-point ordered categorical
scale, a factor analysis using polychoric correlations
was done to take into account the covariance structure
of the responses to individual questions. The choice of
a one factor solution was justied by the high eigenvalue
of the rst factor (879, 74% as a cumulative percentage
of the variance explained) and the high communalities
of the original variables (between 043 and 069). We
used the principal component method for factor
extraction and the regression scoring method to obtain
the factor scores. The factor score was transformed to a
0100 scale, with 0 indicating worst health and
100 indicating best health.
To validate the use of symptom questions for diagnosing
chronic diseases, WHO implemented in 2003 a diagnostic
item probability study in seven countries. Patients were
selected from clinics if they were positive for any of the
specic disease conditions based on a gold standard
diagnostic test, and these patients were considered to be
true positives for that particular condition. The patients
were then traced back to their homes and asked, for all
Articles
disease conditions, the same symptomatic questions as
respondents from the WHS. Additionally, a sample of
respondents matched by sex, age, and country of origin
was drawn from the WHS if they had negative responses
to all the self-reported diagnosis questions for depression,
asthma, arthritis, angina, and diabetes. These respondents
were considered to be the true negatives for the study.
The individual response rates, calculated as the ratio of
com pleted interviews in selected respondents in the sam-
ple, excluding ineligible respondents from the denom-
inator, ranged from 63% in Israel to 99% in the
Philippines (detailed response rates available on
request).
The diagnosis of depression was based on the
International Classication of Diseases tenth revision
(ICD-10) diagnostic criteria for research for depressive
episodes,
39
and was derived from an algorithm that took
into account respondents reporting symptoms of
depression during the past 12 months. The individual
questions used to assess these symptoms were based on
the World Mental Health Survey version of the Composite
International Diagnostic Interview.
40

The diagnosis for angina was based on the algorithm
derived from the Rose questionnaire.
41
For asthma and
arthritis, the sensitivity and specicity of all potential
combinations of answers to these symptomatic
questions were checked based on responses from the
diagnostic item probability study. The combination of
answers that produced the best result based on the
Receiver Operator Characteristic analysis was used to
apply a diagnosis for each respondent in all 60 countries
of the WHS sample. Respondents were regarded as
positive for diabetes if they reported ever being
diagnosed with diabetes. Questions about diabetes were
asked in only 46 of the countries that implemented the
long version of the questionnaire. All diagnoses of these
chronic physical diseases applied to the past 12 months
from the date of interview. For most of the analysis,
respondents were grouped on the basis of their disease
status into one of the following: respondents having
none of the aforementioned health conditions,
respondents having any of the single conditions alone,
respondents having any of the chronic physical diseases
alone in conjunction with depression, respondents
having two or more comorbidities without depression,
and respondents having two or more comorbidities
with depression.
Analysis
The prevalence of each chronic physical disease was
estimated, rst aloneie, without any of the other
conditions presentthen comorbid with depression
but without any additional conditions present, and then
two or more comorbid conditions with or without
depression. The prevalence of depression in respondents
who had any one of the conditions was also estimated.
All these estimates were calculated using post-stratied
probability weights. To make valid comparisons across
countries, age and sex standardisations were done
using WHOs World Standard Population for age and
the UN Statistical Division for sex ratio.
42,43

The mean of the health score was calculated using
probability weights for the entire sample after
stratication by sex, age, education, and income
quintile, as well as respondents disease status. To test
the statistical dierence of health scores between each
pair of disease groups, a one-way analysis of variance
using a Schee test was done to adjust for multiple
comparisons. Linear regression analysis was used on
the pooled dataset of 46 countries to model the relation
between respondents health state and whether they
had depression, a chronic physical disease, or a
combination thereof, after controlling for country of
origin, sex, age, education, marital status, occupational
status, income level, and any interaction between sex
with the other demographic variables. To establish
whether cultural dierences in countries aected the
relation between disease state and overall health state,
interaction terms between marital status, education,
and income quintile with the country variable were
included in the model.
Responses to some health domains such as sleep and
aect are likely to be inuenced by whether the
respondent is clinically depressed, which could lead to
spurious conclusions about the decrements in health
associated with depression. To test for this possibility,
we did two further analyses. The rst analysis explored
the association of disease states with each of the two
questions of health measure which assess overall health
and do not include any symptoms of depression.
Second, we used a recursive regression technique to
model the eect of depression when the dependent
variable, the health score, contained only two
domainsmobility and vision. Then, progressively,
other domains were added to estimate the health score.
The eect of depression on each successive health score
was assessed at each marginal addition of a domain by
evaluating changes in the regression coe cient. This
regression analysis was repeated until all eight health
domains were included and their coe cients for
depression compared. Minimum dierences in the
coe cient for each successive regression would
corroborate the eects of depression on decrements in
health as genuine and not the result of a systematic
reporting bias. All analysis was coded and done using
STATA version 9.2.
Role of the funding source
This study was funded by WHO. The sponsor of the
study had no role in study design, data collection, data
analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report. The
corresponding author had full access to all the data in the
study and had nal responsibility for the decision to
submit for publication.
Articles
Results
The prevalence for depression alone, each chronic disease
alone, depression with each chronic physical disease, and
having multiple chronic conditions with or without
depression for 60 countries was estimated with CIs
(results not shown, available on request). At the worldwide
level, the prevalence for having any one condition alone
did not exceed 50%. The prevalence of having diabetes
alone had the lowest overall prevalence of 20% (1822).
However, since diabetes prevalence was based on
self-report, the role of reporting bias that possibly
underestimates the true prevalence cannot be ruled out.
Depression alone had the next lowest overall prevalence
at 32% (3035). Asthma alone had an overall
prevalence of 33% (2936), prevalence of arthritis
alone was 41% (3843), and angina alone
45% (4348). There were variations across countries,
but the range of dierences in prevalence of any one
condition did not exceed eight percentage points.
A signicant percentage of respondents with any one
of the chronic physical conditions also had depression.
For respondents with diabetes, at a worldwide level,
93% (73113) also had depression, 107% (91123)
with arthritis also had depression, 150% (129172)
with angina, and respondents with asthma had the
highest prevalence of depression at 181% (159203).
For the 71% (6676) of respondents who had
comorbidity of two or more chronic physical conditions,
nearly a quarter (23%) also had depression in addition to
their existing comorbid conditions. Thus, the prevalence
of depression in respondents with chronic diseases is
signicantly higher than in respondents without chronic
diseases (32%, p<00001).
The gure shows the mean health score and the
95% CIs for each disease. Respondents without any of
the chronic diseases or depression had the highest
health score, 906ie, reported having the best health.
Respondents with asthma, angina, arthritis, or diabetes
alone, had mean health scores of 803, 796, 793,
and 789, respectively, which were signicantly dierent
from having no disease but not from each other.
Respondents with depression had the lowest health
score among all the chronic disease conditions,
729 (p<00001). Respondents who had depression
comorbid with another chronic condition had much
lower mean health scores than respondents who had
the chronic condition alone (p<001). For respondents
who had two or more chronic conditions excluding
depression, their mean health score was 718, lower
than any of the disease conditions alone but higher
than any disease state comorbid with depression. The
lowest overall mean health score was for respondents
with two or more chronic conditions comorbid with
depression (561). These results show that comorbid
depression is signicantly associated with lower health
states in respondents with chronic conditions in
comparison to having chronic conditions, including
multiple chronic conditions, without depression
(p<00001).
We examined mean health scores by disease state in
more detail by looking across sociodemographic variables
(results not shown). The patterns are consistent, and for
depression alone the mean health score is lower than for
other chronic conditions alone, across all socioeconomic
variables. For all comorbid depression, the mean health
score is lower across all socioeconomic variables than for
any of the chronic conditions alone or for depression
alone. Thus, having depression comorbid with another
chronic physical disease lowers health status substantially,
irrespective of a respondents age, sex, and other
demographic variables.
The coe cients of a regression model in the table
summarises the relation between overall health and the
dierent disease states and the sociodemographic
determinants of sex, age, education, employment status,
income quintile, and marital status. We also controlled
for country of residence, interaction of country with
education, martial status and income quintile, and
interaction of sex with education, employment status,
and income quintile (results not shown).
The results from the model indicate that lower
coe cient values are associated with lower health
scores. Results of the model show that being older is
indicative of decreased health status, as is having less
education, having lower income, and being unemployed.
Women had a lower overall health score, and the
decrements in health were greater for women who were
unemployed, less educated, or widowed as indicated by
the signicant coe cients for the interaction terms of
sex with these demographic variables (results not
shown). There does not seem to be a signicant
dierence in health status between being married and
906
803
N
o
c
h
r
o
n
i
c
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
A
s
t
h
m
a
o
n
l
y
A
n
g
i
n
a
o
n
l
y
A
r
t
h
r
i
t
i
s
o
n
l
y
D
i
a
b
e
t
e
s
o
n
l
y
D
e
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
o
n
l
y
D
e
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
n
d
a
r
t
h
r
i
t
i
s
D
e
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
n
d
a
n
g
i
n
a
D
e
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
n
d
a
s
t
h
m
a
D
e
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
n
d
d
i
a
b
e
t
e
s
T
w
o
o
r
m
o
r
e
c
h
r
o
n
i
c
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
D
e
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
n
d
t
w
o
o
r
m
o
r
e
c
h
r
o
n
i
c
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
796 793
0
10
20
30 M
e
a
n

h
e
a
l
t
h

s
c
o
r
e

(
0
1
0
0
)
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
789
729
671
585
718
561
658
654
Figure: Global mean health by disease status
Data from WHS 2003.
Articles
never having been married or cohabitating. However,
being separated, divorced, or widowed is associated
with lower health scores.
Overall, disease status has a greater association with
reported health scores than do sociodemographic
characteristics. Controlling for all other factors, having
depression is associated with the lowest health scores,
either alone or comorbid with other chronic
diseases (p<00001). The coe cient values from the
model show that the comorbid state of depression with
diabetes causes even greater decrements in health than
the addition of the two conditions separately. This
nding is suggestive of an interactive eect between
depression and diabetes that causes an extra negative
eect on health beyond the simple addition of each of
the two conditions. Having more than two chronic
diseases without depression (coe cient 1197),
although associated with a lower health score than
having any one chronic disease, has much less of a
negative association with health than does having
depression alone (coe cient 1389), or depression
comorbid with one of the chronic diseases (coe cients
range from 1677 to 2343). Respondents with two or
more chronic diseases in addition to having depression
had the lowest health scores of all the disease groups
(coe cient 2438).
Interacting sociodemographic variables with the
country variable did not show statistically signicant
change the coe cients of depression and comorbid
depression in the model, which suggests that cultural
dierences across countries and their interaction with
sociodemographic characteristics does not aect the
inuence of depression on overall health.
To rule out the eects of depression on some of the
health domains included in the health measure, we
compared the mean scores by disease status for the two
general questions on overall self-rated health and
di culties with work and activities (results not shown).
Although the scores for the di culties with work
question were higher than the overall health question,
the pattern across disease states for both questions was
quite similar to the pattern seen for the overall mean
health score. Respondents who reported no chronic
conditions had the highest scores, respondents with
depression alone or comorbid with another condition
had the lowest scores overall. Even respondents with two
or more chronic conditions but no depression scored
higher than any respondent with depression alone or
comorbid with another condition.
We also did a recursive regression as described in the
methods section (results not shown). The coe cient
for depression in the model with the least-related of the
health domains, vision and mobility, had a value of 99.
Adding a third domain, pain, the coe cient for
depression rose slightly to 136. With each successive
addition of a health domain, the coe cient does not
exceed 139. The addition of more domainseven
those that are likely to be most responsive to the
presence of depression such as sleep or energy and
aectdid not have an appreciable addition on the
average eect of depression on health status. The
coe cient remains fairly stable irrespective of the
composition of domains that underlie the computation
of the health score. These analyses show that our
ndings are unlikely to indicate a bias due to inclusion
of items in the overall health status score that are related
to depression.
Independent variables Coe cients
(standard error)
Sex (reference category=men)
Women 203 (007)*
Age group (reference category=1519 year olds)
3044 220 (009)*
4559 558 (011)*
6069 978 (014)*
7079 1530 (018)*
80+ 2219 (027)*
Marital status (reference category=married)
Never married 002 (01)
Cohabitating 020 (019)
Separated, divorced, or widowed 193 (011)*
Education (reference category=no school)
Less than primary 088 (012)*
Primary completed 177 (012)*
Secondary completed 220 (013)*
Greater than secondary 269 (014)*
Employment status (reference=unemployed)
Currently employed 177 (008)*
Income quintiles (reference category=lowest quintile)
Second quintile 077 (010)*
Third quintile 118 (011)*
Fourth quintile 173 (011)*
Highest quintile 241 (012)*
Disease status (reference=no health conditions)
Depression alone 1389 (020)*
Angina alone 668 (017)*
Arthritis alone 592 (016)*
Asthma alone 654 (015)*
Diabetes 353 (026)*
Depression+angina 2047 (042)*
Depression+arthritis 1677 (046)*
Depression+asthma 1944 (039)*
Depression+diabetes 2343 (086)*
More than one chronic condition without
depression
1197 (016)*
Depression with more than one chronic condition 2438 (031)*
Total number of respondents 142 755
Coe cients for country and sociodemographic interactions not shown.
*p<001.
Table: Regression results for overall health
Articles
Discussion
The worldwide prevalence of depression, asthma, angina,
arthritis, and diabetes based on data collected in the
World Health Surveys, and used in the analysis presented
here, are similar to the data reported by WHOs Global
Burden of Disease study.
44
The data show that comorbidity
between chronic physical conditions and depression is
common, and that people with chronic diseases are
signicantly more likely to suer from depression than
those without (p<0.0001). Our data indicate that
depression is associated with a decrement in health that
is signicantly greater than those associated with the
other chronic diseases in this study. Though depression
has previously been shown to be associated with disability
and declines in health-related quality of life, this is the
largest scale study to our knowledge that shows this
decline using direct comparisons across physical
conditions in multiple countries with a common
measurement strategy. Furthermore, we have also shown
that depression comorbid with other chronic diseases
produced signicantly greater decrements in health than
from one or more chronic diseases, and that this additive
eect is substantially amplied in the case of depression
comorbid with diabetes. These associations remained
evident after adjustment for sociodemographic, country
of origin, and economic factors.
Our ndings are consistent with earlier studies that
have shown a high degree of association between
depression and disability.
45
There are, however, few
studies that have compared the eect of depression with
other chronic diseases. One reason for our ndings could
be that depression is associated specically with
decrements in mental domains of health, which were
included in the composite health score we computed for
our analyses. However, in the recursive regression
analysis, we showed that adding each health domain
serially does not alter the substantive results, since the
size of the depression regression coe cient is barely
changed. This nding conrms that the measure is not
biased towards depression. Another reason for our
ndings might be that depression is associated with a
negative assessment of functioning in all domains and
therefore what one is measuring is merely a negative
frame of mind that leads to reporting biases. An
illustration of such a response bias is shown in the study
by Owsely and colleagues,
46
who assessed the eect of
depression in elderly individuals on their response to a
vision questionnaire. After controlling for demographics,
general health, and vision, depression was found to be
associated with reduced scores on the questionnaire,
suggesting negative reporting as a function of being
depressed rather than actual vision ability. To address
this bias, the WHS also included vignettes in the survey
whereby each respondent was presented with a set of
brief descriptions of individuals in a xed level of health
for a particular domain. Five vignettes per domain were
presented ranging, for example, from quadriplegia at one
extreme of mobility, to a marathon runner at the other
extreme. Respondents were asked how they would rate
their di culty in that particular domain if they were the
person described in each of the vignettes. The examination
of these rating patterns show that respondents with and
without depression showed the same pattern of rating,
even though they diered in self-report of their own
experiences in each domain. This nding suggests that
depressed respondents were not reporting things more
negatively for the same level of health, and further
supports the absence of biased reporting due to
depression (results not shown). Our vignette method was
possibly not su ciently sensitive in detecting systematic
reporting biases: though we do not believe this to be the
case, this possibility needs to be investigated in future
studies. Additionally, the reporting of depressive
symptoms or diagnosis could vary between countries
because of cultural dierences in reporting such
symptoms. If respondents in some countries
underreported their depressive symptoms, leading to an
underestimate of the prevalence of depression in these
countries, and if this was associated with denial of health
problems, it would in fact narrow the dierence in the
reported decrements in health between those with and
without depression. Our results show this situation was
not the case, that even after controlling for country
eects, the decrements in health due to depression, both
in pure and comorbid states, continue to remain
signicant. So if underestimating of depression
prevalence is occurring, it actually strengthens the
ndings that depression increases decrements in health.
Thus, these reporting biases, if they exist, do not detract
from our substantive ndings.
The WHS was a cross-sectional study and did not
include questions on onset and duration of illness,
uctuations in course and details of health-care use such
as number and timing of contacts with health-care
services, the reasons for contact, and the outcome
following contact. Hence, we cannot establish what
burden depression, and its comorbidity with other
chronic diseases, places on the health system, how
depression can modify the course of these disorders, and
whether treatment of depression when present with
these chronic physical diseases would alter their course.
For the estimation of prevalence, the algorithms for the
chronic physical conditions were based on a small
validation study in a few countries that used negatives
drawn from respondents in the WHS who self-reported
no chronic diseases. Since these conditions are known to
have an average prevalence in the general population of
around 5%, the likelihood of these true negative
respondents having any one of the above diagnoses is
low. Both depression and angina were based on validated
algorithms, but the algorithms of asthma and arthritis
could benet from a more comprehensive validation
study, since the presence of some false negative
respondents cannot be ruled out. The algorithms might
Articles
need to be modied if larger validation studies are done
in more countries and if the true negatives were also
identied on a gold standard test. Diabetes was based on
self-report, and the role of reporting bias on the prevalence
presented in our study is noted. However, we do not
think that the possibility of a small misclassication bias
would substantially alter the core message of this study
that being sad is bad for ones health.
In conclusion, we report the largest population-based
worldwide study to our knowledge that explores the
eect of depression in comparison with four other
chronic diseases on health state. Our main ndings
show that depression impairs health state to a
substantially greater degree than the other diseases. A
signicant percentage of respondents have depression
in addition to their existing chronic physical conditions,
a group that is often unrecognised and untreated.
29,47,48

This nding is of special importance, considering the
presence of depression and its treatment is clearly related
to the outcome of these chronic diseases.
7,4850
Comorbidity
with depression signicantly worsens the health state of
people with chronic diseases. The need for timely
diagnosis and treatment of depressive disorders to
reduce the burden on public health is imperative. In
many primary care settings, patients presenting with
multiple disorders that include depression often dont
get diagnosed, and if they do, often treatment is focused
towards the other chronic diseases.
6
Depression can be
treated in primary care or community settings with
locally available cost-eective interventions.
3,51
On the
basis of our results, addressing the further exacerbation
of disability due to depression needs to be a priority of
health systems worldwide. Primary care providers must
be taught not to ignore the presence of depression when
patients present with a chronic physical condition, in
view of the marked eect that it has on an individuals
health. This goal can be accomplished in part by sending
a message which, in addition to reducing the stigma
surrounding mental illness, can alert providers and the
public at large that depression is a disease at least on a
par with physical chronic diseases in damaging health.
Contributors
SM, SC, and TBU contributed to the design of the study. SM, SC, EV, AT,
and VP contributed to the analyses. All authors were involved in the
development of the manuscript and approved the nal version. The
views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not
necessarily represent the views or policies of the Asian Development
Bank or the World Health Organization.
Conict of interest statement
We declare that we have no conict of interest.
Acknowledgments
AFROBlaise Sondo (Burkina Faso), Djona Avocksouma (Chad), Sitti
Djaouharia Chihabiddine (Comores), Georges Moyen (Congo,
Brazzaville), M Seka Monney Firmin (Cote DIvoire), Makonnen Asefa
(Ethiopia), Richard Biritwum (Ghana), Fredrick Otieno (Kenya), Sidon
Konyani (Malawi), Mamadou Bassry Ballo (Mali), Maye Mint Haidy
(Mauritania), P Burhoo (Mauritius), M Zauana (Namibia), Babacar
Drame (Senegal), Zaid Kimmie (South Africa), Isabel Thembi Zwane
(Swaziland), Musonda Lemba (Zambia), Julita Maradzika (Zimbabwe)
AMRO/PAHOClia Landmann Szwarcwald (Brazil), Maritza Molina
Achcar (Dominican Republic), Fernando Sacoto (Ecuador), Tim Farrell
(Guatemala), G Olaiz Fernndez (Mexico), M W Torres Numbay
(Paraguay), Jorge Agulla (Uruguay). EMROMustapha Azelmat
(Morocco), Ashfaq Ahmed (Pakistan), Nourredine Achour (Tunisia),
Gohar Wajid (United Arab Emirates), Christine Kotarakos (INRA-ECO
EU surveys), Aida Pilav (Bosnia and Herzegovina), Marijan Erceg
(Croatia), Vlasta Mazankova (Czech Republic), Andrus Saar (Estonia),
Roman R.Shakarishvili (Georgia), Jozsef Vitrai (Hungary), Bruce Rosen
(Israel), Maksut Karimovich Kulzhanov (Kazakhstan), Ineta Pirkitna
(Latvia), Jorun Ramm (Norway), Tamara Maximomva (Russian
Federation), Maria Letkovicova (Slovakia), Tit Albreht (Slovenia), Rosa
Mataix (Spain), Adnan Kisa (Turkey), Volodimir Olexandrovich
Kolodenko (Ukraine) SEAROP Arokiasamy (India), Kyi Soe
(Myanmar), Sanjoy Nandy (Nepal), Thushara Fernando (Sri Lanka)
WPRORussell Blamey (Australia), Keqin Rao (China), Buongnong
Boupha (Laos Peoples Democratic Republic), Maimunah A Hamid
(Malaysia), Laurie Ramiro (Philippines), Duong Huy Lieu (Vietnam).
References
1 Ustun TB, Chatterji S. Global burden of depressive disorders and
future projections. In: Dawson A, Tylee A, eds. Depression: social
and economic timebomb. London: BMJ Books, 2001.
2 Ustun TB, AyusoMateos JL, Chatterji S, Mathers C, Murray CJ.
Global burden of depressive disorders in the year 2000.
Br J Psychiatry 2004; 184: 38692.
3 Hyman S, Chisolm D, Kessler R, Patel V, Whiteford H. Mental
Disorders. In: Jamison DT, Mosley WH, Bobadilla JL,
Measham AR, eds. Disease control priorities in developing
countries, 2nd edn. New York: Oxford University Press; 2006.
4 Solomon DA, Keller MB, Leon AC, et al. Multiple recurrences of
major depressive disorder. Am J Psychiatry 2000; 157: 22933.
5 Andrews G. Should depression be managed as a chronic disease?
BMJ 2001; 322: 41921.
6 Cassano P, Fava M. Depression and public health: an overview.
J Psychosom Res 2002; 53: 84957.
7 Noel PH, Williams JW Jr, Unutzer J, et al. Depression and
comorbid illness in elderly primary care patients: impact on
multiple domains of health status and well-being. Ann Fam Med
2004; 2: 55562.
8 Cassileth BR, Lusk EJ, Strouse TB, et al. Psychosocial status in
chronic illness. A comparative analysis of six diagnostic groups.
N Engl J Med 1984; 311: 50611.
9 Chapman DP, Perry GS, Strine TW. The vital link between
chronic disease and depressive disorders. Prev Chronic Dis 2005;
2: A14.
10 Katon W, Schulberg H. Epidemiology of depression in primary
care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 1992; 14: 23747.
11 Harpole LH, Williams JW Jr, Olsen MK, et al. Improving
depression outcomes in older adults with comorbid medical
illness. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2005; 27: 412.
12 Summary: the global burden of disease. Boston: Harvard School of
Public Health, 1996.
13 Strine TW, Chapman DP, Kobau R, Balluz L, Mokdad AH.
Depression, anxiety, and physical impairments and quality of life in
the US noninstitutionalized population. Psychiatr Serv 2004; 55:
140813.
14 Ciechanowski PS, Katon WJ, Russo JE. Depression and diabetes:
impact of depressive symptoms on adherence, function, and costs.
Arch Intern Med 2000; 160: 327885.
15 Alonso J, Ferrer M, Gandek B, et al. Healthrelated quality of life
associated with chronic conditions in eight countries: results from
the International Quality of Life Assessment (IQOLA) Project.
Qual Life Res 2004; 13: 28398.
16 Bayliss EA, Ellis JL, Steiner JF. Subjective assessments of
comorbidity correlate with quality of life health outcomes: initial
validation of a comorbidity assessment instrument.
Health Qual Life Outcomes 2005; 3: 51.
17 Fortin M, Lapointe L, Hudon C, Vanasse A, Ntetu AL, Maltais D.
Multimorbidity and quality of life in primary care: a systematic
review. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2004; 2: 51.
18 Fortin M, Bravo G, Hudon C, et al. Relationship between
multimorbidity and health-related quality of life of patients in
primary care. Qual Life Res 2006; 15: 8391.
Articles
19 Goodwin RD, Olfson M, Shea S, et al. Asthma and mental
disorders in primary care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2003; 25: 47983.
20 Kosloski K, Stull DE, Kercher K, Van Dussen DJ. Longitudinal
analysis of the reciprocal eects of self-assessed global health and
depressive symptoms. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2005; 60:
296303.
21 Katon W, Sullivan M, Russo J, Dobie R, Sakai C. Depressive
symptoms and measures of disability: a prospective study.
J Aect Disord 1993; 27: 24554.
22 Isacson D, Bingefors K, von Knorring L. The impact of depression
is unevenly distributed in the population. Eur Psychiatry 2005; 20:
20512.
23 Arnow BA, Hunkeler EM, Blasey CM, et al. Comorbid depression,
chronic pain, and disability in primary care. Psychosom Med 2006;
68: 26268.
24 Egede LE. Diabetes, major depression, and functional disability
among US adults. Diabetes Care 2004; 27: 42128.
25 Simon GE, Chisholm D, Treglia M, Bushnell D. Course of
depression, health services costs, and work productivity in an
international primary care study. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2002; 24:
32835.
26 Simon GE, Revicki D, Heiligenstein J, et al. Recovery from
depression, work productivity, and health care costs among primary
care patients. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2000; 22: 15362.
27 Wang JJ. Prevalence and correlates of depressive symptoms in the
elderly of rural communities in southern Taiwan. J Nurs Res 2001; 9:
112.
28 Herrman H, Patrick DL, Diehr P, et al. Longitudinal investigation
of depression outcomes in primary care in six countries: the LIDO
study. Functional status, health service use and treatment of people
with depressive symptoms. Psychol Med 2002; 32: 889902.
29 Andrews G. Should depression be managed as a chronic disease?
BMJ 2001; 322: 41921.
30 Bogner HR, Cary MS, Bruce ML, et al. The role of medical
comorbidity in outcome of major depression in primary care: the
PROSPECT study. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 2005; 13: 86168.
31 Chisholm D, Diehr P, Knapp M, Patrick D, Treglia M, Simon G.
Depression status, medical comorbidity and resource costs.
Evidence from an international study of major depression in
primary care (LIDO). Br J Psychiatry 2003; 183: 12131.
32 Katon W, Von Kor M, Lin E, et al. Improving primary care
treatment of depression among patients with diabetes mellitus: the
design of the pathways study. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2003; 25: 15868.
33 Ustun TB, Chatterji S, Mechabal A, Murray CJL, WHS
Collaborating Groups. The World Health Surveys in health systems
performance assessment: debates, methods, and empericism.
Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003.
34 Salomon JA, Mathers CD, Chatterji S, Sadana R, Ustun TB,
Murray CJL. Quantifying individual levels of health: denitions,
concepts and measurement issues. In: Murray CJL, Evans D, eds.
Health systems performance assessment: debates, methods and
empericism. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2003.
35 Furlong WJ, Feeny DH, Torrance GW, Barr RD. The Health Utilities
Index (HUI) system for assessing health-related quality of life in
clinical studies. Ann Med 2001; 33: 37584.
36 Ware J Jr, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health
Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability
and validity. Med Care 1996; 34: 22033.
37 Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the
EuroQol Group. Ann Med 2001; 33: 33743.
38 Ustun TB, Chatterji S, Villanueva M, et al. WHO Multi-country
survey study on health and responsiveness 20002001. In: Murray
CJL, Evans D, eds. Health Systems Performance Assessment:
Debates, Methods and Empericism. Geneva: World Health
Organization, 2003.
39 WHO. The ICD-10 classication of mental and behavioural
disorders: diagnostic criteria for research (DCR-10). Geneva: World
Health Organization, 1993.
40 Kessler RC, Ustun TB. The World Mental Health (WMH) Survey
Initiative Version of the World Health Organization (WHO)
Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI).
Int J Methods Psychiatr Res 2004; 13: 93121.
41 Rose GA. The diagnosis of ischaemic heart pain and intermittent
claudication in eld surveys. Bull World Health Organ 1962; 27:
64558.
42 Ahmad OB, Boschi-Pint C, Lopez AD, Murray CJL, Lozano R,
Inoue M. Age Standardization of Rates: a new WHO standard.
Geneva: World Health Organization, 2001.
43 United Nations Population Division. World population prospects:
the 2000 revision. New York: United Nations, 2000.
44 Mathers CD LAMC. The burden of disease and mortality by
condition: data, methods and results for 2001. In:
Lopez AD MCEMMCJD, ed. Global burden of disease and risk
factors. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001: 45240.
45 Ormel J, Kempen GI, Deeg DJ, Brilman EI, van Sonderen E,
Relyveld J. Functioning, well-being, and health perception in late
middle-aged and older people: comparing the eects of depressive
symptoms and chronic medical conditions. J Am Geriatr Soc 1998;
46: 3948.
46 Owsley C, McGwin G Jr. Depression and the 25-item National Eye
Institute Visual Function Questionnaire in older adults.
Ophthalmology 2004; 111: 225964.
47 Luber MP, Hollenberg JP, Williams-Russo P, et al. Diagnosis,
treatment, comorbidity, and resource utilization of depressed
patients in a general medical practice. Int J Psychiatry Med 2000; 30:
113.
48 Theme-Filha MM, Szwarcwald CL, Souza-Junior PR.
Socio-demographic characteristics, treatment coverage, and
self-rated health of individuals who reported six chronic diseases in
Brazil, 2003. Cad Saude Publica 2005; 21 (suppl): 4353.
49 Lin EH, Katon W, Rutter C, et al. Eects of enhanced depression
treatment on diabetes self-care. Ann Fam Med 2006; 4: 4653.
50 Katon W, Von Kor M, Lin E, et al. Improving primary care
treatment of depression among patients with diabetes mellitus: the
design of the pathways study. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2003; 25: 15868.
51 Patel V, Araya R, Bolton P. Treating Depression in the developing
world. Trop Med Int Health 2004; 9: 53941.
VIA USPS CERTIFIED MAIL, RRR April 5, 2012
Article No.: 7010 1670 0001 9008 0291
Ms. Sheryl L. Loesch, Clerk of Court
U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida
401 West Central Boulevard, Suite 1200
Orlando, Florida 32801-0120
RE: Gillespie v. Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, FL, et al, Case No.: 5:10-cv-00503-Oc-10TBS
Dear Ms. Loesch:
This letter concerns a number of apparent failures by the Clerk in the above captioned case. In
addition, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida does not appear to comply
with the Americans with Disabilities Act. (ADA). Some issues beyond the Clerks authority are
presented in this letter for context.
My experience in this case would cause a reasonable person to question the fairness and
impartiality of this Clerk and Court. See Plaintiffs Response to Order to Show Cause (Doc. 58).
As set forth in the Complaint (Doc. 1), this lawsuit is about the misuse and denial of judicial
process under the color of law in the Florida state court action Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems &
Cook, PA, et al, case no. 05-CA-007205, Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, Florida. The state court
denied me the right to lawfully adjudicate my case due to the conflict of interest of attorney
Ryan Christopher Rodems who unlawfully represented his firm, Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA,
against me, a former client, on the same matter as the prior representation, the Amscot lawsuit.
This District Court has continued the misuse and denial of judicial process under the color of law
when it failed, among other things, to disqualify Mr. Rodems in this action pursuant to the
holding of McPartland v. ISI Inv. Services, Inc., 890 F.Supp. 1029, M.D.Fla., 1995. (Doc. 20).
McPartland has been a mandatory authority on disqualification in the Middle District of Florida
since entered J une 30, 1995 by J udge Kovachevich.
The state court action turned into a personal vendetta for Mr. Rodems on J anuary 19, 2006 when
he commenced a vexatious libel counterclaim against me, which continued through September
28, 2010 whereupon Rodems voluntarily dismissed the case without prejudice.
Since March 3, 2006 Mr. Rodems directed, with malice aforethought, a course of harassing
conduct toward me that has aggravated my disability, caused substantial emotional distress and
served no legitimate purpose. (Doc. 36). Mr. Rodems unprofessional conduct is apparent in his
letter to me dated December 13, 2006, copy enclosed. (Exhibit 1). For example:
I recognize that you are a bitter man who apparently has been victimized by your own
poor choices in life. You also claim to have mental or psychological problems, of which I
have never seen documentation. However, your behavior in this case has been so
abnormal that I would not disagree with your assertions of mental problems. (P1, 3)
8
U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida April 5, 2012
Page - 2
So, in addition to your case's lack of merit, you are cheap and not willing to pay the
required hourly rates for representation. (P3, 2).
Mr. Rodems prevented the lawful adjudication of both the state and federal cases through his
repeated violation of FL Bar Rule 4-3.3 Candor Toward The Tribunal. (Exhibit 1). Mr. Rodems
made numerous false statements of material fact to the tribunal, failed to cooperate with
opposing counsel, and disrupted the tribunal for strategic advantage. Mr. Rodems failed to
disclose to the court legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be
directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel. (Exhibit 1).
As set forth in my Petition (SC11-1622) to the Florida Supreme Court (Doc. 62), Mr. Rodems
made false statements to the tribunal to have an arrest warrant issued for me for the purpose of
forcing a walk-away settlement agreement in the state court case, and to force a walk-away
settlement agreement in this Court for my federal civil rights and ADA disability lawsuit.
CASE MANAGEMENT
1. Pursuant to Local Rule 3.05, the Clerk designated this action as a Track Two Case
September 30, 2010 for case management purposes. Upon information and belief, this case is a
Track Three Case pursuant to Local Rule 3.05, complex litigation as set forth in Plaintiffs
Response To Order To Show Cause (Doc. 58); see paragraph six (6) below, and paragraph
twenty-two (22), which is too large to cite here.
6. For case management purposes under Local Rule 3.05, Plaintiff believes this
action is a complex litigation case due to the nature of the allegations against a Florida
Circuit Court, three circuit court judges, court counsel, the ADA coordinator, the law
firm that gives rise to the action, and the attorney and firm hired to represent, and later
betrayed, the plaintiff. The Plaintiff, an indigent, disabled, unrepresented, nonlawyer,
appearing pro se, alleges misuse and denial of judicial process under the color of law,
violation of his Civil Rights, and the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). Counsel of
record Ryan Christopher Rodems, a one-time defendant himself in this case, made the
action impossibly complex by intentionally misleading this Court with false and untrue
statements in his pleadings, in violation of Rule 11(b), FRCP.
THE CLERK FAILED TO PUT VITAL DOCUMENTS ON CM/ECF AND PACER
2. The Clerk failed to put vital documents I filed in this case on the Case Management and
Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) system to view on PACER. One such document is Doc. 2,
Exhibits 1-15 to the Complaint (Doc. 1) filed September 28, 2010 when I personally commenced
the case in the Ocala Division and hand-delivered the complaint and exhibits to a deputy clerk.
Doc. 2, Exhibit 4 is my Emergency Motion To Disqualify Defendants Counsel Ryan
Christopher Rodems & Baker, Rodems & Cook, PA submitted J uly 9, 2010 in the state court
action; in this Court the motion is Doc. 2, Exhibit 4 to the Complaint (Doc. 1), but not viewable
on PACER. This negatively affected my case because Magistrate J udge David Baker, who is
Page - 3
located in Orlando, could not view the document located in Ocala when he made rulings in the
case. The document was only viewable in person in Ocala, or by request to send the physical file
to Orlando. There is no evidence that the physical file was sent to Orlando.
I brought this issue to the attention of Chief J udge Anne Conway by letter dated March 22, 2012,
see Doc. 68, Motion To Amend The J udgment, the letter is attached as an exhibit to the motion,
and contains 33 pages; a three page letter to Chief J udge Conway and 30 pages of enclosures.
PRE-LITIGATION COMMUNICATION WITH JAMES LEANHEART
3. Prior to personally filing this pro se case, I wrote August 30, 2010 to J ames Leanheart,
Court Operations Supervisor, about filing documents on the CM/ECF system and PACER. This
is the operative language from paragraph five of the accompanying letter: (Exhibit 2)
Myclaimsinvolve documents in the state court record from the Circuit Civil Court
of the 13th J udicial Circuit, includingan amended complaint (150 pages), and an
emergency motion to disqualify counsel (190 pages). What is the procedure for including
or incorporating these numerous and sometimes large documents into mycivil rights
complaint?
Mr. Leanheart did not respond in writing, but we spoke by phone September 10, 2010. Following
Mr. Leanhearts instructions, I filed all the documents in paper September 28, 2010. I personally
filed the case September 28, 2010 and personally handed the paper documents to a deputy clerk.
But the Clerk did not put any of the exhibits on the CM/ECF system and/or PACER, not the
amended complaint (Exhibit 3), not the emergency motion to disqualify counsel (Exhibit 4),
none of the 15 exhibits were put on PACER. I complained to the deputy clerks in Ocala more
than once to no avail. I complained in person a number of times and the error was not corrected.
I live in Ocala and almost always hand deliver my documents to a deputy clerk in order to save
the cost of postage or courier service as I am indigent.
My letter dated August 30, 2010 to Mr. Leanheart states I planned to file a pro se lawsuit in two
weeks or so, but I was delayed until September 28, 2010 due to mental illness and other
disabilities, see Doc. 36 for my notice of filing disability information.
NO ADA ACCOMMODATION IN THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
4. I provided the Court a comprehensive ADA file on the morning of September 28, 2010
when I personally filed the lawsuit. I believe Mr. Leanheart was present along with a number of
deputy clerks and perhaps other court personnel. I was assured that the judge in the case would
consider my ADA accommodation request and medical report by Dr. Karin Huffer. I was told
there was nothing else to do.
It appears that the Middle District of Florida does not have an ADA coordinator, and does not
provide an ADA form to make an accommodation request as is the practice in state court.
Page - 4
Furthermore, the website of the Middle District of Florida does not mention the ADA or how to
request a disability accommodation. Among other things, I need to e-file, see below.
My state court ADA file requested designation as complex litigation, case management by the
court, protection from harassment (psychological torture) and perjury, and to follow the holding
of Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 520 (1971), where the U.S. Supreme Court found pro sepleadings
should be held to "less stringent standards" than those drafted by attorneys. And I requested
intensive case management of the kind advocated for by the Hon. Claudia Rickert Isom, in her
law review Professionalism and Litigation Ethics, 28 STETSON L. REV. 323, 324 (1998).
J udge Isom is also a defendant in this case.
When a litigants health is at risk, an opinion decided March 27, 2012 by J udge Richard Posner
of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (Chicago) in a civil rights suit brought under 42 U.S.C.
1983 suggested appointment of counsel because withholding nutritious food would violate the
Eighth Amendment. This is what happened in my state court action J une 21, 2011, see Doc. 33,
Doc. 39, Doc. 47, Doc. 61, Doc. 62. In related case 5:11-cv-00539, see First Amended
Complaint, Doc. 15, paragraph 16:
16. Gillespie is an individual with mental illness as defined by 42 U.S.C. Chapter 114
The Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness Act, 10802(4)(A) and
(B)(i)(III). Gillespie was involuntarily confined in a municipal detention facility for
reasons other than serving a sentence resulting from conviction for a criminal offense.
Gillespies involuntary confinement was in the George E. Edgecomb Courthouse, 800 E.
Twiggs Street, Tampa, Florida. On J une 1, 2011 J udge Arnold issued a politically
motivated warrant to arrest Gillespie for the purpose of harming Gillespie by abuse as
defined 10802(1) and neglect as defined by 10802(5) to force a walk-away settlement
agreement in the state action, and to force a walk-away settlement agreement in the
federal action, Gillespies civil rights and ADA lawsuit against the Thirteenth J udicial
Circuit, Florida, et al., for the misuse and denial of judicial process under the color of
law, and denial of disability accommodation. Gillespie was involuntary confined by two
(2) fully armed deputies of the Hillsborough County Sheriffs Office, and involuntarily
held during an improper full deposition, post final summary judgment, an open-ended
deposition without time limit, with no lunch break, and no meals usually given to an
inmate, until Gillespie suffered injury and agreed to sign a walk-away settlement
agreement. Gillespie was so impaired when he signed the agreement that the record
shows he was unable to make the settlement decision himself.
A copy of the opinion decided March 27, 2012 by J udge Richard Posner of the 7th U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals accompanies this letter. (Exhibit 3). The American Bar Association J ournal
Law News Now reported this story March 28, 2012. (Exhibit 4).
PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF PRIVATE MEDICAL INFORMATION
5. It does not appear that Magistrate J udge David Baker, located in Orlando, could read my
ADA accommodation request and medical report located in Ocala when he made rulings in the
Page - 5
case. Due to Mr. Rodems repeated misrepresentation of my disability, I waived confidentiality
and filed my private medical information on the public record, see Doc. 36. I found the public
disclosure of my private medical information objectionable, revealing mental illness and other
disabilities contained in Dr. Huffers report and my ADA request, just as any reasonable person
would find it objectionable, and a wrongful intrusion into my private life. Still, the Court has
failed to consider my ADA disability information.
TORTURE - ACT OF INFLICTING SEVERE PAIN -
PHYSICAL OR PSYCHOLOGICAL
6. As set forth in Doc. 36 (Notice of filing disability and ADA information), Since March
3, 2006, Ryan Christopher Rodems, counsel for the Defendants, has directed, with malice
aforethought, a course of harassing conduct toward Gillespie that has aggravated his disability,
caused substantial emotional distress and serves no legitimate purpose.
Another word for Mr. Rodems behavior is torture: Torture is the act of inflicting severe pain
(whether physical or psychological) as a means of punishment, revenge, forcing information or a
confession, or simply as an act of cruelty. - Wikipedia. (Exhibit 5)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture
The Psychology of Torture: Torture, whether physical or psychological or both, depends on
complicated interpersonal relationships between those who torture, those tortured, bystanders
and others. Torture also involves deeply personal processes in those tortured, in those who
torture and in others. These interacting psychological relationships, processes and dynamics
form the basis for the psychology of torture. - Wikipedia (Exhibit 6)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology_of_torture
I alleged torture in this federal action, see Doc. 22, notice of voluntary dismissal. Because the
Court would not disqualify Mr. Rodems, I had to dismiss my claims or endure further torture,
which I could not bear. The Court raised the issue of extraordinary circumstances (Doc. 21)
and I replied in Doc. 22 beginning on page three (3). Paragraph 12 states:
J udge Cook is knowingly and willfully harming Gillespie through a confusion
technique. J udge Cook is doing this to help Mr. Rodems and Barker, Rodems & Cook
prevail over Gillespie in the lawsuit over which she presides. J udge Cook knowingly
introduced false information into the court record and other such as a coercive technique
used to induce psychological confusion and regression in Gillespie by bringing a superior
outside force to bear on his will to resist or to provoke a reaction in Gillespie. The CIA a
manual on torture techniques, the KUBARK manual, calls this the Alice in Wonderland
or confusion technique.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KUBARK#CIA_manuals
Page - 6
A copy of Dr. Huffers letter is attached to Doc. 22 as exhibit A. Dr. Huffer wrote:
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. (Dr. Huffer, October 28, 2010, paragraph 2)
The United Nations (UN) Committee against Torture (CAT) prohibits torture, and torture is
prohibited under international law and the domestic laws of most countries in the 21st century,
however the United States did not agree to join the UN ban on torture, and the United States
claims it's citizens have the U.S. Constitution to protect them. Therefore it is appropriate to seek
redress for torture in federal court under 42 U.S.C. 1983.
MOTION TO FILE ELECTRONICALLY DENIED
7. My motion to file electronically (Doc. 6) was denied (Doc. 17) October 17, 2010 by
Magistrate J udge Baker. I have maintained a PACER account in good standing since 1999.
My notion to file electronically can also be considered a reasonable accommodation request
under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). My request submitted to this Court September
28, 2010, and again in Doc. 36, see Exhibit 2, page 17, states as follows:
ADA Request No.6: Mr. Gillespie requests time to scan thousands of pages of
documents in this case to electronic PDF format. This case and underlying cause of
action covers a ten year period and the files have become unmanageable and confusing
relative to Gillespie's disability. Mr. Gillespie is not able to concentrate when handling a
large amount of physical files and documents. He is better able to manage the files and
documents when they are organized and viewable on his computer. Mr. Gillespie will
bear the cost of converting files and documents to PDF.
The failure to file electrically prevented me from being on an equal footing with the other parties
in this case who could e-file documents from the comfort of their office or home without the
time and expense of mailing, hiring a courier service, or serving the documents in person.
The technology to file documents electronically is fairly simple and cost effective. I have a
website with documents in this case online at the following URLs:
http://yousue.org/litigation/
http://yousue.org/turner-v-rogers/
Page - 7
http://yousue.org/ryan-christopher-rodems/
http://yousue.org/bar-complaint-of-robert-w-bauer/
http://yousue.org/circuit-court-judge-martha-j-cook/
http://yousue.org/13th-judicial-circuit-hillsborough-co-florida/
My emergency motion to disqualify counsel described above is also filed free on Scribd at
http://www.scribd.com/doc/55960451/
Still, the document I personally filed in paper format September 28, 2010 in the Ocala Division
has not been put on the Courts CM/ECF system to view on PACER.
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California offers online e-filing
registration instructions for pro se litigants, found at this URL:
http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/pages/871
I meet the following technical requirements set forth by the Northern District of California:
1. A computer, the internet, and email on a daily basis so you can e-file your documents and
receive notifications from the Court.
2. A scanner to scan documents that are only in paper format (like exhibits).
3. A printer/copier because each documents that you e-file will also need to be sent to the
judge in hard copy (the judges copy is called the chambers copy).
4. A word-processing program to create your documents.
5. A .pdf reader and a .pdf writer, which enables you to convert word processing documents
into .pdf format. Only .pdf documents are accepted for e-filing. Adobe Acrobat is the most
common program used. The reader (Adobe Acrobat Reader) is free, but the writer is not. Some
word processing programs come with a .pdf writer already installed.
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California offers an online pro se
ECF Registration form in active PDF format.
INCORRECT DATE/TIME STAMP ON COMPLAINT BY CLERK
8. The Clerks date/time stamp shows the Complaint (Doc. 1) was filed 2010 SEP 28 AM
7:47 which time is incorrect. The Court does not open until 8:30 AM, and I filed the Complaint
myself in person by handing the Complaint directly to a deputy clerk about 8:47 AM.
Page - 8
INCORRECT PLAINITFF ADDRESS BY CLERK OF COURT
9. The Clerk used an incorrect mailing address for me, necessitating a corrective motion,
see Plaintiffs Motion to Correct Mailing Address, filed October 5, 2010. (Doc. 9). My correct
address is listed on the complaint and every document filed in this case. My address has not
changed since 2005. The motion states as follows:
Plaintiff pro se Gillespie moves Court to correct his mailing address:
1. The Court is sending Plaintiff Gillespie's mail to the wrong address. Please use
the correct address, listed on the complaint: 8092 SW I15th Loop, Ocala, Florida 34481.
INCORRECT PLAINITFF PHONE NUMBER BY CLERK OF COURT
10. The Clerk used an incorrect telephone number for me, necessitating a corrective motion,
see Plaintiffs Motion to Correct Phone Number, filed October 13, 2010. (Doc. 15). My correct
phone number is listed on the complaint and every document filed in this case. My home phone
number has not changed since 2005. The motion states as follows:
Plaintiff pro se Gillespie moves the Court to correct his phone number and states:
1. The PACER docket shows an incorrect phone number for Plaintiff pro se
Gillespie. The correct phone number is listed on the complaint: (352) 854-7807.
FAILURE OF MR. RODEMS TO COMPLY - RULE 7.1 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
11. Mr. Rodems failed to comply with the Rule 7.1. Disclosure Statement and the Court did
not take any corrective action. Mr. Rodems represented Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA, which is a
Florida profit corporation according to the Florida Division of Corporations. (Exhibit 8).
Rule 7.1(a) states A nongovernmental corporate party must file 2 copies of a disclosure
statement that:
(1) identifies any parent corporation and any publicly held corporation owning
10% or more of its stock; or
(2) states that there is no such corporation.
(b) Time to File; Supplemental Filing. A party must:
(1) file the disclosure statement with its first appearance, pleading, petition,
motion, response, or other request addressed to the court; and
(2) promptly file a supplemental statement if any required information changes.
Upon information and belief, Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA is a nongovernmental corporate party
under Rule 7.1(a) and Mr. Rodems had a duty to comply with Rule 7.1(b) and file the disclosure
statement with his first appearance September 29, 2010. Mr. Rodems failed to do so. Had Mr.
Rodems complied with Rule 7.1, the Court may have been better informed on the issue of my
Page - 9
motion to disqualify Mr. Rodems as counsel. (Doc. 8). I believe Mr. Rodems failure to comply
with Rule 7.1(b) was intended to mislead the Court.
FAILURE OF THE CLERK TO OFFER PRO SE SERVICES
12. The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida does not appear to
offer pro se services as compared to other federal District Courts. This is a denial of equal
protection under the law under the Fourteenth Amendment. For example:
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California offers pro se litigants a
Pro Se Handbook, also known as a Handbook for Litigants Without a Lawyer, which can be
downloaded online or available free of charge from the Clerk's Office. This is a link to
Representing Yourself in Federal Court: A Handbook for Pro Se Litigants
http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/prosehandbk
In addition to a pro se handbook, at the above link the District Court for the Northern District of
California offers the following services to pro se litigants:
Official Court Forms in active PDF format. The link shows eleven (11) different forms.
http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/civillitpackets
Civil Litigation Packets, at the above URL, collections of forms in active PDF for the following:
Complaint packet
Motion packet
Opposition (to motion) packet
Initial Disclosures packet
Motion for Permission for Electronic Case Filing and Proposed Order
Tips for Pro Se Filers: http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/prosetips
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California has a comprehensive
directory of all Article III judges and Magistrate J udges with photos and biographies, found
online at this link http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges
28 USC 455 - LETTER TO CHIEF JUDGE ANNE CONWAY
13. My letter to Chief J udge Conway (Doc. 68) made a request under the federal Freedom of
Information Act, or other applicable law, pursuant to 28 USC 455, for the biography and/or
personnel file of Magistrate J udge David A. Baker. As of today I do not have a reply.
Subsequently I found some of this information myself with a Google search. It appears that
Magistrate J udge Baker was formerly a partner in the law firm of Foley & Lardner, LLP. It
Page - 10
appears that the tenure of Attorney David A. Baker at Foley & Lardner included time in the
firms offices in Wisconsin and Orlando.
On May 25, 2011 Krista J . Sterken, Esq., an associate of Foley & Lardner LLP, Wisconsin,
telephoned me at 11:55 a.m. offering legal representation in this matter. (Doc. 49). Ms. Sterkens
offer of pro bono legal representation was only contingent upon a conflict search. On May 27,
2011 Michael D. Leffel, Esq., a partner at Foley & Lardner LLP, notified me that Foley &
Lardner could not represent me. (Doc. 49). Neither Ms. Sterken nor Mr. Leffel informed me of a
conflict as a result their conflict search. Therefore I concluded that the decision not to represent
me involved another issue. Given the forgoing, a reasonable person could conclude that J udge
Baker may have had some role in the decision by Foley & Lardner not to represent me.
CONCLUSION
Given the above, my experience in this case would cause a reasonable person to question the
fairness and impartiality of this Clerk and this Court. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Neil J . Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala, Florida 34481
Telephone: (352) 854-7808
Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net
Enclosures
CC: Honorable Anne C. Conway, Chief United States District J udge
Hon. William Terrell Hodges, Ocala Division
Hon. David A. Baker, Orlando Division
Robert E. O'Neill, US Attorney, US Attorney's Office, 400 N. Tampa St., Suite 3200, Tampa, FL
33602-4798 (For the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, Florida, et. al)
Catherine B. Chapman, Guilday, Tucker, Schwartz & Simpson, P.A., 1983 Centre Pointe,
Boulevard, Suite 200, Tallahassee, FL 32308-7823 (For Robert W. Bauer, et. al)
Ryan C. Rodems, 400 North Ashley Drive, Suite 2100, Tampa, Florida 33602
Page 1 of 2
VIOLATION OF BAR RULE 4-3.3 BY RYAN CHRISTOPHER RODEMS
Ryan Christopher Rodems, counsel for Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A. and William J .
Cook, prevented the lawful adjudication of both the state and federal cases primarily
through his repeated violation of FL Bar Rule 4-3.3 Candor Toward The Tribunal.
Mr. Rodems violated the requirements of FL Bar Rule 4-3.3 in his response to the Court
(Doc. 12) to the motion to disqualify (Doc. 8) as follows:
1. Mr. Rodems failed to disclose to the Court the actual interest of himself, his law
partners, and his law firm Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A. in the Amscot litigation, as set
forth in the Certificate of Interested Person in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh
Circuit in Eugene R. Clement, Gay Ann Blomefield, and Neil Gillespie v. AMSCOT
Corporation, Case No. 01-14761-AA. (copy provided)
2. Mr. Rodems failed to disclose to the Court a letter by Amscots lawyer, Charles
Stutts of Holland & Knight, LLP, that described the relationship between the Amscot
lawsuit and the state court case Neil J . Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A. and
William J . Cook, 05-CA-007205, Hillsborough Circuit Court. Mr. Stutts wrote February
13, 2007 that This former action [Amscot] is, of course, at the heart of your pending
action against Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A.. (copy provided).
3. Mr. Rodems failed to disclose to the Court his letter dated December 13, 2006 to
Neil J . Gillespie that set forth his prejudice in this matter, including: (copy provided)
I recognize that you are a bitter man who apparently has been victimized by your
own poor choices in life. You also claim to have mental or psychological problems,
of which I have never seen documentation. However, your behavior in this case has
been so abnormal that I would not disagree with your assertions of mental
problems. (P1, 3)
So, in addition to your case's lack of merit, you are cheap and not willing to pay
the required hourly rates for representation. (P3, 2).
4. Mr. Rodems failed to disclose to the Court his actual conflict, established by Order
of Circuit Court J udge Richard Nielsen dated J anuary 13, 2006, that found a cause of
action for Fraud and Breach of Contract against Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A. and
William J . Cook in the state court action 05-CA-007205. (copy provided). 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 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2d Dist. 1965).
1
Page 2 of 2
5. Mr. Rodems failed to disclose to the Court legal authority in the controlling
jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client,
McPartland v. ISI Inv. Services, Inc., 890 F.Supp. 1029, M.D.Fla., 1995.
In McPartland v. ISI Investment Services, Inc., 890 F.Supp. 1029, (US
District Court, MD of Florida, Tampa Division) the court held that [1]
Under Florida law, attorneys must avoid appearance of professional
impropriety, and any doubt is to be resolved in favor of disqualification.
[2] To prevail on motion to disqualify counsel, movant must show
existence of prior attorney-client relationship and that the matters in
pending suit are substantially related to the previous matter or cause of
action. [3] In determining whether attorney-client relationship existed, for
purposes of disqualification of counsel from later representing opposing
party, a long-term or complicated relationship is not required, and court
must focus on subjective expectation of client that he is seeking legal
advice. [5] For matters in prior representation to be substantially related
to present representation for purposes of motion to disqualify counsel,
matters need only be akin to present action in way reasonable persons
would understand as important to the issues involved. [7] Substantial
relationship between instant case in which law firm represented defendant
and issues in which firm had previously represented plaintiffs created
irrebuttable presumption under Florida law that confidential information
was disclosed to firm, requiring disqualification. [8] Disqualification of
even one attorney from law firm on basis of prior representation of
opposing party necessitates disqualification of firm as a whole, under
Florida law.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
CASE l-IO ..
EUGENE R. CLEMENT,
GAY ANN BLOMEFIELD , and
NEIL GILLESPIE, individually and
on behalf of others similarly situated,
Appellants,
i

1

1
I
I

v.
AMSCOT CORPORATION,
Appellee.
______________, 1
JOINT STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
The Parties, by and th_ou(Jh tI-leir undersigrled counsel, .. flg
amicably resolved this matter, pursuant to Federal Rule of
Procedure 42 (b) move for dismissal with prejtldice ""to: th
each party bearing its own fees and costs.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this day of November, 2001.
RODEMS & COOK, Gray, Harris, Bobinson,
Shackleford, Farrior
WILLIAM J. CO K, ESQUIRE R. FERNANDEZ, ES
Florida Bar No. 986194 Florida Bar No. 008 5
300 West Platt Street 501 E. Kennedy Blvd
150 Sllite 1400
Tampa, Florida 33606 Tampa, Florida 33602
(813) 489-1001 (TEL) (813) 273-5000 (TE"L)
(813) 489-1008 (FAX) 273-5145
Z.:\.t to rrle :i5 for Appe11ant .. for Appellee
CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS
AND CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.1 and
Eleventh Circuit Rule 26.1-1, counsel for the Appellants certify
that the following persons and entities have an interest in the
outcome of this case.
Alpert, Jonathan L., Esq.
Alpert & Ferrentino, P.A.
Amscot Corporation
Anthony, John A., Esq.
Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A.
Barker, Chris A., Esq.
Blomefield, Gay Ann
Clement, Eugene R.
Cook, William J., Esq.
Gillespie, Neil
Gray, Harris, Robinson, Shackleford, Farrior, P.A.
Lazzara, The Honorable Richard A.
United States District Judge, Middle District of Florida
MacKechnie, Ian
Rodems, Ryan Christopher, Esq.
Case 8:99-cv-02795-RAL Document 121 Filed 12/10/01 Page 1 of 1 PageID 1363
United States Court of Appeals
for the Eleventh Circuit
56 Forsyth Street, N.W.
Atlanta, GA 30303-2289
(404) 335-6100
Closed
Docket #: 01-14761-AA
Short Style: Eugene R. Clement v. Amscot Corporation
Docket Date: 08/23/2001
Lead Case:
Agency:
Nature of Suit: Other: Statutory Actions
Misc. Type:
Clerk: Dixon, Eleanor
Clerk Phone: (404) 335-6172
District Information
Docket #: 99-02795-CV-T-26 Judge: Richard A. Lazzara
Dkt Date: 12/08/1999 District: Florida-Middle
NOA Date: 08/20/2001 Office: MFL-Tampa
Secondary Case Information
Docket #: Judge:
Dkt Date: / /
Case Relationships
Docket # Short Style Relation Status
Pending Motions
No Pending Motions
US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX
1 of 5 4/5/2012 2:12 PM
(404) 335-6100
01-14761-AA
Eugene R. Clement v. Amscot Corporation
EUGENE R. CLEMENT,
individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
GAY ANN BLOMEFIELD,
NEIL GILLESPIE,
Plaintiffs-Intervenors
Counter-Defendants
Appellants,
versus
AMSCOT CORPORATION,
A Florida Corporation,
2 of 5 4/5/2012 2:12 PM
Defendant-Intervenor
Counter-Claimant
Appellee.
United States Court OF Appeals
FOR the Eleventh Circuit
(404) 335-6100
Appellant Appellant Attorney
Eugene R. Clement
Address Not On File
Record Excerpts filed on 10/03/2001
Fees: Paid on 08/20/2001
William John Cook
Barker, Rodems & Cook P.A.
400 N ASHLEY DR STE 2100
TAMPA, FL 33602-4350
(813) 489-1001
Fax: (813) 489-1008
wcook@barkerrodemsandcook.com
No Briefing Information Found.
Gay Ann Blomefield
Address Not On File
William John Cook
TAMPA, FL 33602-4350
(813) 489-1001
Fax: (813) 489-1008
Neil Gillespie
Address Not On File
Appellant Brief Filed filed on 10/03/2001
William John Cook
TAMPA, FL 33602-4350
(813) 489-1001
Fax: (813) 489-1008
Appellee Appellee Attorney
Amscot Corporation
Address Not On File
Person Not Found
3 of 5 4/5/2012 2:12 PM
John A. Anthony
GrayRobinson, P.A.
201 N FRANKLIN ST STE 2200
TAMPA, FL 33602-5822
(813) 273-5066
Fax: (813) 221-4113
janthony@gray-robinson.com
Initial Service
Lara R. Fernandez
101 E KENNEDY BLVD STE 2700
TAMPA, FL 33602-5150
(813) 227-7404
Fax: (813) 229-6553
lfernandez@trenam.com

(404) 335-6100
File Date Entry Party Pending
08/20/2001 Fee Status: Paid (08/20/01) for Eugene R. Clement
Eugene R.
Clement
No
08/20/2001 Fee Status: Paid (08/20/01) for Gay Ann Blomefield
Gay Ann
Blomefield
No
08/20/2001 Fee Status: Paid (08/20/01) for Neil Gillespie
Neil
Gillespie
No
08/24/2001
DKT7CIV (Docketing 7) issued. cc: Loesch, Sheryl L. cc: Cook,
William J. cc: Anthony, John A.
No
08/24/2001 Briefing Notice Issued No
09/04/2001 Appearance Form Submitted: William J. Cook
William John
Cook
No
09/04/2001 Transcript Order Form: Appellants- No transcript required No
09/04/2001 Civil Appeal Statement Form- Appellants No
09/05/2001 Probable Jurisdiction Noted No
4 of 5 4/5/2012 2:12 PM
09/07/2001 Appearance Form Submitted: John A. Anthony
John A.
Anthony
No
09/28/2001 Certificate of Readiness No
10/03/2001
Appellant's Brief Filed: Appellants-Clement, Eugene R., Blomefield,
Gay Ann, and Gillespie, Neil (Atty: William J. Cook)
Neil
Gillespie
No
10/03/2001
Record Excerpts: Appellant-Clement, Eugene R. (Atty: William J.
Cook)
Eugene R.
Clement
No
11/09/2001 Joint Stipulation to Dismiss Appeal with Prejudice No
12/07/2001
The parties joint stipulation for dismissal of this appeal with prejudice,
which is construed as a motion to dismiss this appeal with prejudice,
with the parties bearing their own costs and attorney fees, is
GRANTED(JLE/RB).j
No
12/07/2001
DIS-4 (Dismissal 4 Letter) issued. cc: Cook, William J. cc: Anthony,
John A. To: Loesch, Sheryl L.
No
12/07/2001 CASE CLOSED No
PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt
04/05/2012 14:12:01
PACER Login: ng0053 Client Code: njg
Description: docket sheet Case Number: 01-14761-AA
Billable Pages: 4 Cost: 0.40
Send Comment Change Client Code View Billing History Search
5 of 5 4/5/2012 2:12 PM
Tel 813 227 8500 Holland & Knight LLP
Holland+ Kntght
Fax 813 229 0134 100 NorthTampa Street. Suite 4100
Tampa. FL 33602-3644
www.hklaw.com
CharlesL. Stutts
8132276466
charles.stutts@hklaw.com
February 13, 2007
VIAFEDEX
Neil J. Gillespie
8092 SW 11S
th
Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
Re: Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A., et al.; Case No. OS-CA-720S
Dear Mr. Gillespie:
Amscot Corporation has asked me to respond to your letter of February 10, 2007 in
which you request that Mr. Ian MacKechnie, President of Amscot, agree to his deposition in the
above-referenced matter.
The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida in 2001 dismissed all claims
brought by you, Eugene R. Clement and Gay Ann Blomefield, individually and on behalf of
others, against AnlSCOt in connection with its deferred deposit transactions. This former action
is, of course, at the heart of your pending action against Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A.
Mr. MacKechnie views the prior litigation as closed, and neither he nor others at Amscot
have any interest in voluntarily submitting to deposition or otherwise participating in the pending
matter. Accordingly, Mr. MacKechnie nlust decline your request.
Please contact me if you have questions or care to discuss the matter.
Sincerely yours,
HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP
:PI
cc: Ian MacKechnie
Atlanta Bethesda Boston Chicago Fort Lauderdale Jacksonville LosAngeles
Miami NewYork NorthernVirginia Orlando Portland San Francisco
Tallahassee Tampa Washington. D.C. West Palm Beach
Beijing Caracas* Helsinki* Mexico City TelAviv* Tokyo *Representative Office
BARKER,RODEMS &COOK
PROFESSIONALASSOCIATION
ATTORNEYS ATLAW
CHRIS A. BARKER
Telephone
400NorthAshleyDrive, Suite2100
RYAN CHRISTOPHER RODEMS
Facsimile
WILLIAM ]. COOK Tampa, Florida33602
December13,2006
Mr. NeilJ. Gillespie
8092SW115
th
Loop
Ocala,Florida34481
DearNeil:
Asyouknow,IcalledyouonDecen1ber12,2006to schedulehearingsbeforeJudgeIsomon
February7,2007. Youdidnotanswer, so Ileftyouavoicemail. Laterthatafternoon,yousenta
lettertomebyfacsimile. Init,youclaimtobeunavailableFebruary7andthatyou"hopetohave
representationwithin30days."Youhavemadethatassertionforseveralmonthsnow,without
retainingcounsel,andIcannotdelaythisproceedinganyfurtheronyourunfulfilledpromisesof
retainingcounsel. YoualsostateinyourletterthatIhave"threatenedthelawyersthatwere
helping"you, whichiscompletelyunfounded. Iwilladdressthatissuebelow.
JudgeIsomhasalldayonFebruary5, 2007open,andwecouldresolveallpendingmotions,
exceptforyourmotionforsummaryjudgment,onthatdate. Ileftyouavoicemailonthistoday.
AshasJudgeNielsen,Ihaveenduredforseveralmonthsnowdisparagingremarksfromyou, false
allegations,attacksonmycredibilityandotherwiseboorishbehavior. Ihavenotrespondedto
muchof itbecauseIrecognizethatyouareabittermanwhoapparentlyhasbeenvictimizedby
yourownpoorchoicesinlife. Youalsoclaimtohavementalorpsychologicalproblems,of which
I haveneverseendocumentation. However,yourbehaviorinthiscasehasbeensoabnormalthatI
wouldnotdisagreewithyourassertionsof mentalproblems. Ihavemaintainedcourtesyinevery
meetingwithyou,includingawarmsentimentfollowingahearing-- onlytobeaccusedafterthat
of"taunting"you.
IintendtocontinuetreatingyouwiththesamedignityandrespectasIwouldopposingcounselin
anyothercase;however,IhaveFirstAmendmentrights,too. Iamnotobligatedto acceptyour
false statements,disparagingremarks,attacksonmycredibilityandtheothertacticsyouhaveused
inthiscase. Iwantto ensurethatyouunderstandmyposition,andsoIfinditnecessarynowto
writeto correcttherecord.
Mr. Neil J. Gillespie
December 13,2006
Page 2
As for your claims that I "threatened the lawyers" that is simply false. I forwarded bye-mail
portions of your October 18,2006 to Ms. Jenkins, Ms. Buchholz and Mr. Snyder, and stated "Neil
Gillespie has filed a letter with Judge Richard Nielsen, and has attributed comments to the three of
you. As an officer of the Court, I believe I have a duty to advise you of this. Please review pages
8-10 of the attached letter. Should any of you desire the complete document, with attachments,
please advise." I have received no reply. In fact, the first confirmation that my letter had been
received by these three attorneys was your December 12 facsimile letter.
Let me explain why I sent the portions of the letter to them. Your tactic of naming these three
lawyers as people you had spoken to, and then attributing statements to them anonymously and en
masse is very damaging to them professionally. I sent the portions of the October 18, 2006 letter
to them so that they could review it and do whatever they felt necessary.
I also sent it to them because I questioned the veracity of your letter. I considered four possibilities
about the statements you attributed to them anonymously: First, you may be lying. Second, you
may be taking some or all of the statements out of context. Third, you may be paraphrasing and
changing the meaning of the actual statements. Fourth, one or all of these attorneys may have
never said anything to you, but were being used by you to endorse statements that you would later
use to attempt to recuse Judge Nielsen.
I also disagree that my actions have harmed your ability to hire counsel. The primary problem is
that your case is weak. You are essentially claiming in this action that our law firm breached its
contract with you by not paying you a portion of the attorneys' fees earned in the Amscot case.
Every attorney knows -- or should know -- that the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar and the
caselaw prohibit splitting attorneys' fees with a nonlawyer.
It is also clear by reviewing the Closing Statement and your letters to us that you knew that
Amscot was paying all of your attorneys' fees and that you would not have to pay any portion of
your settlement for attorneys' fees and costs. In this case, you received 100% of your settlement,
not 60%, and Amscot paid all of your attorneys' fees and costs.
No one has ever rendered an opinion that your case has any merit. You misunderstood the
meaning of a denial of a motion to dismiss. It is not a comment on the merits. In fact, the Court is
required to accept all of your allegations as true. That requirement disappears after the motion to
dismiss is resolved. Now, you are required to prove your specious allegations. Any rational
attorney looking at this situation would not take this case on a contingency fee basis and would
instead require you to pay them by the hour.
You, apparently, from your comments to me and in court filings, are unwilling to pay an attorney
fairly for the work that would need to be done. In fact, you even moved the Court to have an
December13,2006
Page3
attorneyappointedforyouatthegovernment'sexpense. Ofcourse,thereisnoprovisionunderthe
ADAforappointmentofcounsel,butthefactthatyoubelievethegovernmentshouldfootthebill
foryouto filebaselesslawsuitsisentirelyconsistentwithyouractionsinthis caseandpastcases.
So,inadditiontoyourcase'slackof merit,youarecheapandnotwillingtopaytherequired
hourlyratesforrepresentation. Yet,youhavehadnoproblempayingfilingfees forthisbaseless
lawsuit,thecourtreportersto transcribehearingsandourtelephonecalls,andforthefrivolous
appealof thediscoveryorder.
Anothermajorproblem,Igather,inhiringattorneysisyourextortionofyourformerattorneysby
threateningto file aFloridaBarcomplaintiftheydo notsplitportionsoftheirearnedfees with
you. Infact, youhavefiledthreegrievancesagainstBillCookinconnectionwiththismatter-- all
ofwhichweredismissed,meaningyourallegationswereunfounded. Rhetorically,whywouldan
attorneywishto representyougivenyourpastactionsagainstotherattorneys?
Additionally,anyreasonableattorneywouldfindyourconductinthiscasetobereprehensible.
1. YouhaveroutinelyviolatedtheFloridaRulesofCivilProcedure,onlyto claimthat
proselitigantsareentitledto specialtreatment. Ateveryhearing,IrecallJudge
Nielsenhadto adviseyouto followtheproceduralrulesandprotocol. AsIhave
pointedoutwithcitationsofauthority,thelawinFloridais clear: Youareexpected
tofollowtherulesof procedure,andyouarenotentitledtospecialtreatment.
WhenIhavecitedthelawto you,youhavetoldmenotto do so.
2. Youthreatenedto"slammeupagainstthewall." Afterthat, Ihadto requesta
bailiffto attendthehearings. YouclaimedI"taunted"youwhen,afterahearing,I
wishedyouwell.
3. Youhaverecordedatelephoneconversationwithoutmypermission. I assumeyour
researchskillshaveledyouto thestatutesandcaselawonrecordingtelephone
conversationwithoutpermission. Infact, youonlyfiled aportionof thetranscript
ofourveryfirsttelephoneconversationandwebothknowwhy: Younevertoldme
youwererecordingit.
4. Yourepresentedto theCourtthatI"threatened"you, andthecommentonwhich
youbaseditwasmycommenttoyouthatyourlibelingof myclientswas
unnecessary,andthatactwouldcauseyoutohavetopay. Which,itwill. You
haveaccusedmeof perjury.
December13,2006
Page4
5. Youhavefileddefensesto thecounterclaimthatarenonsensical,andyetyou
claimedtobewell-qualifiedto representyourselfwhenImovedforsanctionsand
askedtheCourtto requireyouto hirecounsel.
6. Youtookacontradictorypositionandmovedtohaveanattorneyappointedforyou
becauseyouwerenotqualifiedorableto representyourself, citingyourdisability,
withoutproof,andafederal lawthatdoesnotevenaddresstheappointmentof
counselinacivilaction. Inonehearing,whenJudgeNielsenaskedyoufor
authority,yourepliedwithwordsto theeffectthatyouhaveno traininginthelaw.
Youhaveportrayedyourselfas thevictimwhenitsuitsyouandtheableadvocate
whenitsuitsyou.
7. Youfailedto respondto discovery,forcingmeto fileamotionto compel,which
wasgranted. Yourefusedto complywiththatOrder,filed afrivolous appeal,
whichwasdismissed, andthenpetitionedforwritofcertiorari,whichwasalso
dismissed.
8. WhenIfiled amotionforanOrderto ShowCauseonthediscoveryOrder,you
claimedto bepursuingcoverageof thecounterclaimbyaninsurancecompany.
Youaskedforacontinuanceof thehearingonthatbasis. Wecontactedthe
insurer'sclaimsadjusterandnegotiatedaveryfavorablesettlementforyouof the
counterclaim,andwhenyoufoundout,youwithdrewtheclaim,therebypreventing
thecounterclaimfrombeingresolved.
9. FacinganimminenthearingonyourcontumaciousdisregardfortheCourt'sJuly
24,2006discoveryOrderafteryourappealof itwasdenied,youdecidedto "judge
shop"andattackedJudgeNielsento forcehimto recusehimself. Indoingso, you
citedunrelated,irrelevant u ~ andatternptedtobaithimwithdisparagingand
causticremarks, eventhoughhewaspoliteandrespectfultowardsyouatalltimes,
allowedyouto submitadditionalargumentwhenyoucameto thefirsthearing
unprepared,andgaveyouadditionaltimeto find anattorneywhenwewere
scheduledtohearonOctober4,2006yourdefianceof theJuly24,2006discovery
Order. Nogooddeedgoesunpunished,right?
YousucceededinhavingJudgeNielsenstepdown. Thereisno effectiveprocess
forchallenginghisrecusalorhavingaCourtruleonthemotiveof yourmotionto
disqualifyhim,butifyouwereanattorney,theRulesRegulatingtheFloridaBar
wouldrequiremeto file agrievanceandyouwouldlikelyhavefaced severe
sanctions.
Mr. Neil J. Gillespie
December 13, 2006
Page 5
Neil, we offered to settle with you without pursuing our right to attorneys' fees and costs, as
ordered by Judge Nielsen in tIle July 24, 2006 Order. You rejected it. We offered to settle the
counterclaim with your insurer. You withdrew the insurance claim. You are spending a lot of
money on filing fees, court reporter fees, and gasoline to hand-deliver motions and whatnot. It
appears you want your day in court, so to speak. Judge Isom has all day on February 5, 2007 open.
I urge you to agree to set the hearings on that date. We can then move forward and bring this case
to resolution.
I hope this clarifies my position on matters, and I look forward to working with you.
RCR/so
-- Ili'Mo'_______ .. - --- .--.. .... _
Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A.
400 North Ashley Drive, Suite 2100
Tampa, Florida 33602
Gillespie - 05.5422

.
.
.
.. "
,_
'"" ,--------
- P'TNEY BOWES
: 02 1P $ 000.63
.01.: 0002570237 DEC 13 2006
. r:: MAILED FROM ZIP CODE 33606
Neil J. Gillespie
8092 SW 115
lh
Loop
Ocala Florida 34481
II
i :t:::;i5E:"?
1.,11,.',,',' ,.1/ '"
- --
",,11,,11. ,/,/"11.,/,, ,IL /,",/,//, ,/,1
- _
-, \ ,
) Ii
....'-' , ....
INTHECIRCUITCOURTOFTHETIllRTEENTHJUDICIALCmCUITOF
THESTATEOFFLORIDA,INANDFORHILLSBOROUGHCOUNTY,
CIVILDIVISION
NEILJ.GILLESPIE,
PLAINTIFF,
vs.
BARKER,RODEMS&COOK,P.A.,
aFloridaCorporation;andWILLIAM
J.COOK,
DEFENDANTS.
--------------_-----:/
ORDERONDEFENDANTS'MOTIONTODISMISSANDSTRIKE
TIDSCAUSEcameonforhearingonSeptember26,2005,uponDefendant's
MotiontoDismissandStrike,andcounselforthepartiesbeingpresentandhavingmade
argumentsandthecourthavingconsideredthePlaintiffsRebuttaltoDefendant'sMotion
toDismissandStrike. Defendant'sReplyto PlaintiffsRebuttaltoDefendant'sMotion
toDismissandStrikeandthePlaintiff'sSecondRebuttaltoDefendant'sMotionto
DismissandStrike,andthecourtbeingadvisedfullyinthepremises,itisthereupon,
ADJUDGEDasfollows:
1. Defendant'sMotiontoDismissandStrikeisgrantedinpartanddeniedinpart.
2. ThoseportionsofDefendant'sMotiontoDismissandStrikeseekingto
dismisstheComplaintaredenied. Defendantshallhavefifteendaysfromthedateof this
orderwithinwhichtofileresponsivepleadings.
DIVISION"F "
or, 36
-
//1-
3. Those portions of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and Strike seeking to strike
portions of the Complaint is granted in the following particulars:
a. Paragraphs 47, 48, 49 and 50 of the Complaint are stricken.
b. Exhibit 8 to the Complaint is stricken.
c. All references to or demands for punitive damages are stricken or
failure to comply with 768.72 of the Florida Statutes.
ORDERED in Chambers, at Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida, this
_ day of JAN 13 2006 , 2o_.
RICHARD A. NIELSEN
CIRCUIT JUDGE
Copies furnished to:
Ryan C. Rodems, Esquire
300 West Platt Street, Suite 150
Tampa, Florida 33606
Neil J. Gillespie
8092 SW 115
th
Loop
or' 37
f _
August 30, 2010
Mr. James Leanheart, Court Operations Supervisor
United States District Court, MD of Florida, Ocala Division
Golden-Collum Memorial Federal Building & US Courthouse
207 NW Second Street, Room 337
Ocala, Florida 34475-6666
Dear Mr. Learmeart:
In a two weeks or so I plan to file an Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) lawsuit in
your court. This will be a pro se action since I cannot find counsel to represent me. The
complaint may also allege other civil rights and constitutional claims, or other claims.
In August 2005 I filed a pro se action in your court, Gillespie v. HSBC Bank et al, Case
No. 5:05-CV-362-0C-WTH-GRJ. The proceedings were efficient and well managed.
Pursuant to local Rule 1.01(a) the Court may prescribe by administrative order procedures
for electronic filing and related matters in civil and criminal cases. This is a request to file
documents electronically if you believe this would be beneficial. I live in Oak. Run which
is about 15 miles from the Court. It is not overly burdensome to mail or hand deliver
documents to the Court. I have had a PACER account in good standing since 1999.
Since this is an ADA lawsuit there are documents with my personal HIPAA protected
medical information for the Court to consider, and perhaps attach to the complaint.
Pursuant to local Rule 1.09 I may want to file under seal my personal HIPAA protected
medical information, but that presents a dilemma when the complaint refers to this
information, and to have it under seal may diminish my ADA claims. Any procedural
guidance (not legal advice) you can provide would be appreciated.
My ADA claims (and possibly other claims) involve documents in the state court record
from the Circuit Civil Court ofthe 13th Judicial Circuit, including ADA accommodation
requests, an ADA disability report prepared by my ADA advocate and designer, Dr. Karin
Huffer, various Orders, motions, an amended complaint (150 pages), and an emergency
motion to disqualify counsel (190 pages). What is the procedure for including or
incorporating these numerous and sometimes large documents into my ADA and/or civil
rights complaint? Thank you for your consideration.
11 . i e ie
8092 S 115th L op
Telephone: (352) 854-7807
email: neilgillespie@mfi.net
VIA US Certified Mail, RRR, Article No. 70100780 0000 8981 6504
2
============================================
YOURS TRULY CARDS and GIFTS INC
8449 SW State Rd 200 Ste 137
Ocala, FL. 34481-9693
116602-B004
08/30/2010 02:51:36 PM
============================================
Sales Receipt
Product Sale Final
Description Qty Price
1st Letter 1 $0.44
<oomestic)
(OCALA. FL 34475)
(Weight:O Lb 0.45 Oz)
Certified 1 $2.80
Return Rcpt 1 $2.30
Total $5.54
Cash $10.55
Change ($5.01>
Thank you!
Bi 11#: 1-13168-2-1593952-2
Clerk: WINDOW2
All sales final on stamps and postage.
U.S. Postal Service
CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT
(Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided)
CertifiedFee
Cl
Cl Return ReceiptFee
Cl (EndorsementRequired)
Cl
RestrictedDeliveryFee
Cl (EndorsementRequired)
CO
'0 Total Postage& Fees L...:::.,;::.......i...L-+-----'
Clr-:;-:-:7""'T':"""" ---:----l.---------:-----,

Cl Street. Apt. No.; .s () /..l 1-..& 33
'0 __Ja_1--J/..-':k.----... __ ... -
City, De.,zIP. 3'1l{ -
Home | Help |
Sign In

Track & Confirm FAQs
Label/Receipt Number: 7010 0780 0000 8981 6504
Class: First-Class Mail

Certified Mail

Return Receipt
Status: Delivered

Your item was delivered at 10:11 am on August 31, 2010 in OCALA, FL
34475.

Service(s): Enter Label/Receipt Number.

Detailed Results:
Delivered, August 31, 2010, 10:11 am, OCALA, FL 34475
Acceptance, August 30, 2010, 2:51 pm, OCALA, FL 34481
Processed through Sort Facility, August 30, 2010, 2:51 pm, OCALA, FL 34477

Track & Confirm by email
Get current event information or updates for your item sent to you or others by email.

Site Map Customer Service Forms Gov't Services Careers Privacy Policy Terms of Use Business Customer Gateway
Copyright 2010 USPS. All Rights Reserved. No FEAR Act EEO Data FOIA
Page 1of 1 USPS - Track & Confirm
8/31/2010 http://trkcnfrm1.smi.usps.com/PTSInternetWeb/InterLabelInquiry.do
In the
For the Seventh Circuit

No. 11-2811
TERRANCE PRUDE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
DAVID A. CLARKE, JR., et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.
No. 2:10-cv-00167-JPSJ.P. Stadtmueller, Judge.

SUBMITTED MARCH 7, 2012DECIDED MARCH 27, 2012

Before POSNER, WOOD, and TINDER, Circuit Judges.
POSNER, Circuit Judge. The plaintiff in this prisoners
civil rights suit brought under 42 U.S.C. 1983 complains
that he was subjected to cruel and unusual punishment
by personnel of the Milwaukee County Jail. (He has a
second, less substantial claim that we discuss at the end
of the opinion.) He appeals from the grant of summary
judgment to the four defendants, who are the Sheriff
3
2 No. 11-2811
of Milwaukee County, two County Inspectors who work
at the jail, and a guard.
The plaintiff is serving time in a Wisconsin state
prison, but was transferred to the county jail on several
occasions to enable him to attend court proceedings
relating to a postconviction petition that he had filed.
On the second and third stays, which lasted a week and
10 days respectively, the jail fed him only nutriloaf,
pursuant to a new policy the jail had adopted of
making nutriloaf the exclusive diet of prisoners who
had been in segregation in prison at the time of their
transfer to the jail, even if their behavior in the jail was
exemplary. Nutriloaf (also spelled nutraloaf) is a bad-
tasting food given to prisoners as a form of punishment
(it is colloquially known as prison loaf or disciplinary
loaf). See, e.g., Jeff Ruby, Dining Critic Tries Nutra-
loaf, the Prison Food for Misbehaving Inmates, Chicago
Magazine, Sept. 2010, www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-
Magazine/September-2010/Dining-Critic-Tries-Nutraloaf-
the-Prison-Food-for-Misbehaving-Inmates; Arin Green-
wood, Taste-Testing Nutraloaf: The Prison Loaf
That Just Might Be Unconstitutionally Bad, Slate,
June 24, 2008, www.slate.com/articles/news_and_
politics/jurisprudence/2008/06/tastetesting_nutraloaf.html;
Matthew Purdy, Our Towns: Whats Worse Than
Solitary Confinement? Just Taste This, N.Y. Times, Aug. 4,
2002, www.nytimes.com/2002/08/04/nyregion/our-towns-
what -s-worse-than-soli t ary-confi nement -j ust -t ast e-
this.html (all visited March 15, 2012).
No. 11-2811 3
On his third stay, after two days on the nutriloaf diet,
the plaintiff began vomiting his meals and experiencing
stomach pains and constipation. (He had vomited
during the second stay as well.) He stopped eating
nutriloaf and subsisted for the eight remaining days of
his stay on bread and water (its unclear how he ob-
tained the bread). He had weighed 168 pounds before his
second and third stays at the jail, had lost either 5 or 6
pounds during the second stay, had not regained them,
and by the end of the third stay was down to 154 pounds:
he had lost 8.3 percent of his weight as a result of the
two stays (and he had not been overweight at 168).
A guard sent him to the infirmary after one of the
vomiting incidents during his third stay, and the nurses
there gave him antacids and a stool softener and one
of them told him his weight loss was alarming. Upon
his return to state prison he continued experiencing
painful defecation and bloody stools, and he was diag-
nosed with an anal fissure that the defendants have
not denied had developed while he was in the county jail.
The defendants response to his suit has been contuma-
cious, and we are surprised that the district judge did not
impose sanctions. The defendants ignored the plain-
tiffs discovery demands, ignored the judges order that
they comply with those demands, and continued their
defiance even after the judge threatened to impose sanc-
tions. But the judge failed to carry through on his
threat, so the threat proved empty.
The only evidence the defendants submitted in
support of their motion for summary judgment was a
4 No. 11-2811
preposterous affidavit from a sheriffs officer who is
also an assistant chief of a suburban Wisconsin fire de-
partment. The affidavit states only, so far as bears on
the appeal, that Nutraloaf has been determined to be a
nutritious substance for regular meals. The defendants
made no effort to qualify him as an expert witness. As
a lay witness, he was not authorized to offer hearsay
evidence (has been determined to be . . . nutritious).
No evidence was presented concerning the recipe for
or ingredients of the nutriloaf that was served at the
county jail during the plaintiffs sojourns there. Nutriloaf
isnt a proprietary food like Hostess Twinkies but,
like meatloaf or beef stew, a term for a composite
food the recipe of which can vary from institution to
institution, or even from day to day within an institu-
tion; nutriloaf could meet requirements for calories
and protein one day yet be poisonous the next if,
for example, made from leftovers that had spoiled.
The recipe was among the items of information that the
plaintiff sought in discovery and that the defendants
refused to produce.
Even an affidavit from an expert stating after a
detailed chemical analysis that nutriloaf meets all
dietary requirements would be worthless unless the
expert knew and stated that nutriloaf invariably was
made the same way in the institution. The assistant fire
chiefs affidavit says no such thingand he was not an
expert.
In addition to stonewalling the plaintiff and the
district judge, the defendants failed to file a brief in this
No. 11-2811 5
court and failed to respond to our order to show cause
why they hadnt filed a brief. They seem to think that
the federal courts have no jurisdiction over a county jail.
Deliberate withholding of nutritious food or substitu-
tion of tainted or otherwise sickening food, with the
effect of causing substantial weight loss, vomiting,
stomach pains, and maybe an anal fissure (which is no
fun at all, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anal_fissure
(visited March 15, 2012)), or other severe hardship, would
violate the Eighth Amendment. See, e.g., Hutto v. Finney,
437 U.S. 678, 687 (1978); Atkins v. City of Chicago, 631
F.3d 823, 830 (7th Cir. 2011); Sanville v. McCaughtry,
266 F.3d 724, 734 (7th Cir. 2001); Simmons v. Cook, 154
F.3d 805, 808 (8th Cir. 1998). Not that all nutriloaf is
unhealthful, though all is reputed to have an unpleasant
taste. But we do not know the recipe for the nutriloaf
that was served the plaintiff, or whether the ingredients
were tainted or otherwise unhealthful, because of the
defendants failure to comply with the plaintiffs dis-
covery demands. The defendants decided to defy rather
than to defend. The uncontradicted evidence is that
other prisoners in the jail also vomited after eating the
nutriloaf, and this suggests that it was indeed inedible.
The only possible justification for the district courts
rejection of the plaintiffs Eighth Amendment claim, at
this early stage of the litigation, is that he may not
have sued the right defendants, since he can prevail
against a defendant only by proving that the defendant
was deliberately indifferent to his health. The guard
who sent him to the infirmary knew he had vomited, but
6 No. 11-2811
the guard sent him for medical attention and there is
no suggestion that he was responsible for the composi-
tion of the nutriloaf or had any reason to suspect its ill
effects until the plaintiff got sick. The nurses may have
realized that the plaintiff would suffer seriously if he
werent given a different diet, and maybe they should
have done something other than just treat his symptoms,
but they are not defendants. We dont know the
precise role that any of the four defendantsthe sheriff,
who runs the jail, the two inspectors, and the jail guard
(whether he was the guard who sent the plaintiff to the
infirmary or some other guard is another thing we
dont know)played in making the plaintiff sick. He
filed a grievance with the jail, although after his last
sojourn there, when he was back in state prison
with its adequate diet. The grievance states that the
defendant inspectors had authorized the nutriloaf for
the prisoners in the part of the jail in which the
plaintiff was housed and that theyd done this pursuant
to policy established by the defendant sheriff.
Complaints filed by unrepresented prisoners are sup-
posed to be construed liberally. E.g., McNeil v. United
States, 508 U.S. 106, 113 (1993); Haines v. Kerner, 404
U.S. 519, 520 (1972) (per curiam); Marshall v. Knight, 445
F.3d 965, 969 (7th Cir. 2006); Chavis v. Chappius, 618 F.3d
162, 170-71 (2d Cir. 2010). There are intimations in the
record that jail officialswho may have included one
or more of the named defendantswere aware of the
plaintiffs plight, and it is apparent that nothing was
done to replace the nutriloaf diet that was sickening
him, though he was able somehow to obtain bread. The
No. 11-2811 7
record contains statements that he had tried to solve
this problem by speaking with a [correctional officer],
that after a second incident of vomiting he told officers
again, that he was taken to the clinical office to be
seen by a nurse (presumably guards took him there),
that other inmates were vomiting their nutriloaf meals
(which must have been observed by correctional officers),
and that he had written the sheriff informing him
about their vomiting. Adult vomiting other than
because of illness or drunkenness is rarehealthy, sober
adults do not vomit a meal just because it doesnt taste
goodand if the plaintiff is being truthful there was
a veritable epidemic of vomiting during his stay. A risk
can be so obvious that a jury may reasonably infer
actual knowledge on the part of the defendants. Hall v.
Bennett, 379 F.3d 462, 464 (7th Cir. 2004); see Farmer v.
Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 842-43 (1994). The defendants
have submitted no contrary evidence, once the inadmis-
sible affidavit from the assistant fire chief is ruled out. It
is a possible though certainly not an inevitable in-
ference from the record (and from the defendants contu-
macy) that jail officials were aware that the nutriloaf
being fed the prisoners when the plaintiff was there
was sickening him yet decided to do nothing about it.
That would be deliberate indifference to a serious health
problem and thus state an Eighth Amendment claim.
The dismissal of the suit was premature. Since the
plaintiff has departed from the county jail and the case
involves medical issues, we suggest that the district
court request a lawyer to assist him in litigating his
8 No. 11-2811
claim. The court should also consider imposing sanc-
tions on the defendants.
The plaintiffs other claim is that the defendant jail
guard offered him a sandwich (and not of nutriloaf, either)
if he would spy on other prisoners, and that he had
refused. Bribing prisoners in a nonfederal jail to inform
on other prisoners does not violate any federal law of
which were aware. The failure to give the plaintiff
the sandwich could not be thought cruel and unusual
punishment for his refusing to take the bribe, for it
made him no worse off than he would have been had
no bribe been offeredstuck with a nutriloaf diet. The
second claim adds nothing to the first, so we affirm
its rejection.
The judgment is affirmed in part, reversed in part,
and remanded. We order the defendants to show cause
within 14 days of the date of this order why they
should not be sanctioned for contumacious conduct in
this court. If they ignore this order to show cause like
the last one, they will find themselves in deep trouble.
3-27-12
Constitutional Law
For One Pri soner, Nutri l oaf Di et May Vi ol ate Ei ghth Amendment, Posner Opi ni on
Says
Posted Mar 28, 2012 6:25 AM CDT
By Debra Cassens Weiss
A federal appeals court has reinstated a lawsuit filed by a prisoner who claimed the nutriloaf he ate in the Milwaukee County
J ail was cruel and unusual punishment.
The opinion (PDF) by J udge Richard Posner of the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals suggested appointment
of counsel for the inmate, Terrance Prude, who vomited and suffered an anal fissure after eating nutriloaf at the jail during a
stay to attend court proceedings. J ail officials gave Prude bread and water as a substitute, and his weight dropped from 168 to
154 after two stays at the facility. Other inmates at the jail also vomited after eating nutriloaf.
Withholding nutritious food or substituting sickening food, causing substantial weight loss, vomiting and maybe an anal fissure
would violate the Eighth Amendment, Posner said. He cited Wikipedia for the proposition that such a fissure is no fun at all.
The defendants, including Sheriff David Clarke J r., did not disclose the nutriloaf recipe in response to discovery demands. No
evidence was presented concerning the recipe for or ingredients of the nutriloaf that was served at the county jail during the
plaintiffs sojourns there, Posner wrote. Nutriloaf isnt a proprietary food like Hostess Twinkies but, like meatloaf or beef
stew, a term for a composite food the recipe of which can vary from institution to institution, or even from day to day within an
institution; nutriloaf could meet requirements for calories and protein one day yet be poisonous the next if, for example, made
from leftovers that had spoiled.
Posner said the defendants ignored discovery demands and the trial judges order that they comply. The defendants also
failed to file an appellate brief and failed to respond to an order to show cause whey they didnt do so. They seem to think that
the federal courts have no jurisdiction over a county jail, Posner said. The appeals court issued an order to show cause why
the defendants should not be sanctioned for contumacious conduct and warned they will find themselves in deep trouble if
they fail to comply.
The case is Prude v. Clarke. Hat tip to How Appealing.
Copyright 2012 American Bar Association. All rights reserved.
For One Prisoner, Nutriloaf Diet May Violate Eighth Amendment, Posner ... http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/for_one_prisoner_nutriloaf_die...
1 of 1 3/31/2012 6:30 PM
4
A variety of torture instruments including,
at right, the iron maiden of Nuremberg.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Torture is the act of inflicting severe pain (whether physical or
psychological) as a means of punishment, revenge, forcing
information or a confession, or simply as an act of cruelty.
Throughout history, torture has taken on a wide variety of forms,
and has often been used as a method of political re-education,
interrogation, punishment, and coercion. In addition to state-
sponsored torture, individuals or groups may be motivated to inflict
torture on others for similar reasons to those of a state; however, the
motive for torture can also be for the sadistic gratification of the
torturer.
Torture is prohibited under international law and the domestic laws
of most countries in the 21st century. It is considered to be a
violation of human rights, and is declared to be unacceptable by
Article 5 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Signatories of the Third Geneva Convention and Fourth Geneva
Convention officially agree not to torture prisoners in armed
conflicts. Torture is also prohibited by the United Nations
Convention Against Torture, which has been ratified by 147
countries.
[1]
National and international legal prohibitions on torture derive from a consensus that torture and similar
ill-treatment are immoral, as well as impractical.
[2]
Despite these international conventions, organizations that
monitor abuses of human rights (e.g. Amnesty International, the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture
Victims) report widespread use condoned by states in many regions of the world.
[3]
Amnesty International
estimates that at least 81 world governments currently practice torture, some of them openly.
[4]
1 Definitions
2 History
2.1 Antiquity
2.2 Middle Ages
2.3 Early modern period
2.4 Recent times
2.5 Historical methods of execution and capital punishment
2.6 Etymology
3 Religious prohibitions
3.1 Roman Catholic Church
4 Laws against torture
4.1 United Nations Convention Against Torture
4.1.1 Optional Protocol to the UN Convention Against Torture
4.2 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
4.3 Geneva Conventions
Torture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture
1 of 30 4/5/2012 2:25 PM
5
FromWikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Torture, whether physical or psychological or both, depends on complicated interpersonal relationships between
those who torture, those tortured, bystanders and others. Torture also involves deeply personal processes in
those tortured, in those who torture and in others. These interacting psychological relationships, processes and
dynamics form the basis for the psychology of torture.
1 The torture process to the torturer
1.1 Motivation to torture
2 See also
3 References
4 Further reading
5 External links
Motivation to torture
Research over the past 50 years, starting with the Milgram experiment, suggests that under the right
circumstances and with the appropriate encouragement and setting, most people can be encouraged to actively
torture others.
[1]
John Conroy:
When torture takes place, people believe they are on the high moral ground, that the nation is under
threat and they are the front line protecting the nation, and people will be grateful for what they are
doing.
[2]
Confidence in the efficacy of torture is based upon the behaviorist theory of human behavior.
[3]
Stages of torture mentality include:
Reluctant or peripheral participation
Official encouragement: As the Stanford prison experiment and Milgram experiment show, many people
will follow the direction of an authority figure (such as a superior officer) in an official setting (especially
if presented as mandatory), even if they have personal uncertainty. The main motivations for this appear
to be fear of loss of status or respect, and the desire to be seen as a "good citizen" or "good subordinate".
Peer encouragement: to accept torture as necessary, acceptable or deserved, or to comply from a wish to
not reject peer group beliefs.
Dehumanization: seeing victims as objects of curiosity and experimentation, where pain becomes just
another test to see how it affects the victim.
Disinhibition: socio-cultural and situational pressures may cause torturers to undergo a lessening of moral
inhibitions and as a result act in ways not normally countenanced by law, custom and conscience.
Psychology of torture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology_of_torture
1 of 2 4/4/2012 8:45 PM
6
Techniques discussed in School of the
Americas training manuals, 1987-1991:
[12][5][1]
Motivation by fear
Payment of bounties for enemy dead
False imprisonment
Use of truth serum
Torture
Execution
Extortion
Kidnapping and arresting a targets
family members
After this 1992 investigation, the Department of Defense discontinued the use of the manuals, directed their
recovery to the extent practicable, and destroyed the copies in the field. U.S. Southern Command advised
governments in Latin America that the manuals contained passages that did not represent U.S. government
policy, and pursued recovery of the manuals from the governments and some individual students.
[10]
Notably,
David Addington and Dick Cheney retained personal copies of the training manuals.
[11]
Soon after The army created FM 34-52 Intelligence Interrogation manual. This was used by the U.S. Army until
2007.
The first manual, "KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation,"
dated July 1963, is the source of much of the material in the
second manual. KUBARK was a U.S. Central Intelligence
Agency cryptonym for the CIA itself.
[13]
The cryptonym
KUBARK appears in the title of a 1963 CIA document KUBARK
Counterintelligence Interrogation which describes interrogation
techniques, including, among other things, "coercive
counterintelligence interrogation of resistant sources". This is the
oldest manual, and promotes the use of abusive techniques, as
exemplified by two references to the use of electric shock.
[13]
The second manual, "Human Resource Exploitation Training
Manual - 1983," was used in at least seven U.S. training courses
conducted in Latin American countries, including Honduras,
between 1982 and 1987. According to a declassified 1989 report
prepared for the Senate intelligence committee, the 1983 manual
was developed from notes of a CIA interrogation course in Honduras.
[4]
Both manuals deal exclusively with interrogation.
[14][15]
Both manuals have an entire chapter devoted to
"coercive techniques." These manuals recommend arresting suspects early in the morning by surprise,
blindfolding them, and stripping them naked. Suspects should be held incommunicado and should be deprived of
any kind of normal routine in eating and sleeping. Interrogation rooms should be windowless, soundproof, dark
and without toilets.
The manuals advise that torture techniques can backfire and that the threat of pain is often more effective than
pain itself. The manuals describe coercive techniques to be used "to induce psychological regression in the
subject by bringing a superior outside force to bear on his will to resist." These techniques include prolonged
constraint, prolonged exertion, extremes of heat, cold, or moisture, deprivation of food or sleep, disrupting
routines, solitary confinement, threats of pain, deprivation of sensory stimuli, hypnosis, and use of drugs or
placebos.
[5][16]
Between 1984 and 1985, after congressional committees began questioning training techniques being used by
the CIA in Latin America, the 1983 manual went through substantial revision. In 1985 a page advising against
using coercive techniques was inserted at the front of Human Resource Exploitation Training Manual.
Handwritten changes were also introduced haphazardly into the text. For example, "While we do not stress the
use of coercive techniques, we do want to make you aware of them and the proper way to use them," has been
altered to, "While we deplore the use of coercive techniques, we do want to make you aware of them so that
you may avoid them." (p. A-2) But the entire chapter on coercive techniques is still provided with some items
U.S. Army and CIA interrogation manuals - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KUBARK
2 of 6 4/4/2012 8:51 PM
7
Detai l by Enti ty Name
Fl ori da Profi t Corporati on
BARKER, RODEMS & COOK, P.A.
Fi l i ng Informati on
Document Number P00000075354
FEI/EIN Number 593672653
Date Filed 08/04/2000
State FL
Status ACTIVE
Pri nci pal Address
501 EAST KENNEDY BOULEVARD, STE. 790
TAMPA FL 33602 US
Changed 07/07/2011
Mai l i ng Address
501 EAST KENNEDY BOULEVARD, STE. 790
TAMPA FL 33602 US
Changed 07/07/2011
Regi stered Agent Name & Address
BARKER, CHRIS A
501 EAST KENNEDY BOULEVARD
SUITE 790
TAMPA FL 33602 US
Address Changed: 01/06/2012
Offi cer/Di rector Detai l
Name & Address
Title P
BARKER, CHRIS A
501 EAST KENNEDY BOULEVARD, SUITE 790
TAMPA FL 33602 US
Title VP
RODEMS, RYAN C
TAMPA FL 33602 US
Title ST
Previous on List Next on List Return To List
No Events No Name History
www.sunbiz.org - Department of State http://www.sunbiz.org/scripts/cordet.exe?action=DETFIL&inq_doc_num...
1 of 2 4/5/2012 4:16 PM
8
Previous on List Next on List Return To List
No Events No Name History
COOK, WILLIAM J
TAMPA FL 33602 US
Annual Reports
Report Year Filed Date
2010 01/06/2010
2011 03/02/2011
2012 01/06/2012
Document Images
01/06/2012 -- ANNUAL REPORT
06/30/2011 -- ADDRESS CHANGE
08/04/2000 -- Domestic Profit
Note: This is not official record. See documents if question or conflict.
| Home | Contact us | Document Searches | E-Filing Services | Forms | Help |
Copyright and Privacy Policies
State of Florida, Department of State
www.sunbiz.org - Department of State http://www.sunbiz.org/scripts/cordet.exe?action=DETFIL&inq_doc_num...
2 of 2 4/5/2012 4:16 PM
PACE8SERVICECWNTER
u.s.COURTSPACER. P.O. BOX 277773 ATI.lANTA,GA 38384-7773-
December 22, 1999
Neil J. Gillespie
Neil J. Gillespie
1121 Beach Drive NE
Apt C-2
St Petersburg, FL 33701-1434
Dear Neil J. Gillespie:
Thank you for your interest in PACER. An account has been
established for your firm. For your information, the JUdicial
Conference of the United States has established a fee to be
collected for access to PACER. All registered agencies or
individuals will be assessed the charge of $.60 per minute of
dial-up access
A free account infot1llatibn service is available for all
registered users of PACER on- th-e Internet. It offers a
multitude of on-line servic:fiS including updating account
information and registering with additional courts. Visit our
web site at htt'p://pacer.psc.:u$courts.gov.
Quarterly and sent to each
registered user accruing time-;-:on PACER. Payment in full of the
billed amount is due each or further access to the
system will be restricted until outstanding balances are
cleared.
The phone number(s) for accessing PACER are shown on the
next page.
The U.S. Courts are currently working on moving PACER from
a dial-up service to an Internet service. If the court(s) you
have registered for offer PACER on the Internet, the login and
password issued by the PACER Service Center will allow access to
both the dial-up and Internet PACER sites. There will be a fee
for accessing PACER on the Internet.
If you have any questions regarding your account, please
call my office at 800 676-6856 and a member of my staff will
assist you..

Ted C.
PACER Service Cent:er Man:$gltr:
PUBLIC ACCESS TOCOURT RECORDS
Account Information Redacted
9
July 27, 2012
John Ley, Clerk of Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11 th Circuit
56 Forsyth St., N.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Appeal Nos. 12-11213-C and 12-1 I028-B
Dear Mr. Ley:
Please find enclosed for filing my Consolidated Notice o/CMlECF Prohibition by the
District Court, in support of disability accommodation motion and IFP fee waiver.
I plan to submit July 30, 2012 my Consolidated AmendedMotion/or Disability
Accommodation, for which leave was granted June 19, 2012, Order attached. I apologize
for the delay in submitting this document, which is due to disability and declining health.
I appreciate your letter of July 16, 2012 with information regarding a petition for writ of
certiorari to the Supreme Court. Thank you.
Enclosures
IN UNITED COURT OF APP ALS
LEY
FOR Tl-IE ELEVENTI-I CIRCUIT
No. 12-11 028-B
ESTATE OF PENELOPE GILLESPIE,
NEIL J. GILLESPIE,
Personal Representative of the Estate, Survivor,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
versus
THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, FLORIDA,
HON. JAMES M. BARTON, II,
Circuit Court Judge, and individually,
THE LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT W. BAUER, P.A.,
ROBERT W. BAUER,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
Before WILSON and LVIARTIN, Circuit Judges.
BY THE COURT:
The appellants have tiled a Inotion for reconsideration, pursuant to 11 th Cir. R. 22-1 (c)
and 27-2, of this Court's May. 7, 2012, order denying his motions for leave to proceed on appeal
in forma pauperis, consolidation with case no. 12-11213, tolling of time, and appointment of
counsel. Upon review, the motion for reconsideration is DENIED because the appellants have
offered no new evidence or arguments of merit to warrant relief. The appellants' motion to toll
time is DENIED. The appellants' motion for leave to amend their request for disability
accornn10dations is (]RANTED.
Drop-Of f Package Receipt: 1 of 1
THIS IS NOT ASHIPPING LABEL. PLEASE SAVE FOR YOUR RECORDS.
DROP-OFF LOCATION:
The UPS Store #5520
DROP-OFF DATE/TIME:
Fri 27 Jul 2012 3:40 PM
11100 sw 93 COURT RD
STE 10 ESTIMATED PICKUP DATE:
(352) 402-0099
UPS (Air) Fri 27 Jul 2012 1 pkg
CUSTOMER:
Not Provided
ID Type: Not Provided TOTAL PACKAGES: 1 pkg
TRACKING NUMBER CARRIER &SERVICE wt(lbs)
1Z64589FNW95960107 UPS Next Day Saver 0.950
indicates that the lnfor.ation for each package has been trans.ltted to each
carrier's data syste. Th18 receipt is not confir.atlon that the carrier has
picked up the packages To verify ..hen and if a package has been picked up.
enter one of the fallowing web addresses in your browser and enter the
tracking nu.bers Iisted above.
http://theupsstore.co. (6elect Tracking. then enter Tracking II)
http://.be.co. (6elect Tracking. then enter Tracking ')
You ackno.. ladge that the ship.ent services provided by The UPS Stare ..5520
for the listed packageB are subject to and governed by each Carr ier
Agree.ent. if applicable, the Rates and Service Guide for each carrier, and
the tariff in effect at the t i.e of ahip.ent.
MAKE YOURSELF AT HO"E.
OPEN AHOUSE ACCOUNT TODAY.
BENEFITS INCLUDE MONTHLY BILLING AND GROUP AUTHORIZATION.
POllllered by iShip(t.)
07/27/2012 12:59 PM Pacific Ti.e
Proof of Del i very
Tracking Number: 1Z64589FNW95960107
Service: UPS Next Day Air Saver
Weight: 1.00 lb
Shipped/Billed On: 07/27/2012
Delivered On: 07/30/2012 10:59 A.M.
Delivered To: ATLANTA, GA, US
Signed By: ONEIL
Left At: Front Desk
Print This Page
Close Window
Dear Customer,
This notice serves as proof of delivery for the shipment listed below.
Thank you for giving us this opportunity to serve you.
Sincerely,
UPS
Tracking results provided by UPS: 08/10/2012 10:02 A.M. ET
Close Window
UPS: Tracking Information http://wwwapps.ups.com/WebTracking/processPOD?lineData=Atlanta^...
1 of 1 8/10/2012 10:02 AM

Notice of CM-ECF Prohibition by The District Court

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Notice of CM-ECF Prohibition by The District Court

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

-------------

S-ar putea să vă placă și