IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

STATE OF FLORIDA
NEIL J . GILLESPIE,
Petitioner pro se (nonlawyer),
CASE NO.: SC14-1637
VS.
THE FLORIDA BAR,
Respondent.
_________________________________ /
Petitioners Motion to Extend Time
1. The Petitioner, Neil J . Gillespie, a disabled nonlawyer reluctantly appearing pro se,
henceforth in the first person, moves to extend time under Fla. R. App. P. 9.300(a), and Fla. R.
J ud. Admin. 2.514, and states:
2. This Courts ORDER entered August 22, 2014 (Exhibit A) held inter alia,
Petitioner's letter, filed in this Court on August 20, has been treated as a petition for writ
of mandamus. Petitioner is allowed to and including September 11, 2014, in which to file
a proper petition for writ of mandamus; that complies with Florida Rule of Appellate
Procedure 9.100.
3. A separate ORDER entered by this Court August 22, 2014 (Exhibit B) held inter alia,
The jurisdiction of this Court was invoked by the filing of a Petition for Writ of
Mandamus; however, said petition was not accompanied by the $300.00 filing fee or a
proper motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis as required by Florida Rule of
Appellate Procedure 9.100(b). The filing fee is due and payable at the time of filing the
petition. Petitioner is allowed to and including September 22, 2014, in which to submit
the filing fee or a proper motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis....
4. Under Fla. R. App. P. 9.300(a), Motions, and Fla. R. J ud. Admin. 2.514, Computing and
Extending Time, I respectfully request the Supreme Court extend time for 33 days to and
including October 14, 2014 (Exhibit C) to file a proper petition for writ of mandamus, and
proper motion to proceed in forma pauperis, so that I may obtain counsel of my choice.
2
5. In support of this motion to extend time, I have been reluctantly appearing pro se in the
following legal matters which have taken considerable time, in addition to SC14-1637:
Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. v. Neil J . Gillespie, et al., Marion County Florida, Fifth
J udicial Circuit, No. 42-2013CA-000115-AXXX-XX, a.k.a. case no. 2013-CA-000115.
Wrongful home foreclosure on a HECM reverse mortgage.

The Unlicensed Practice of Law (UPL) Investigation of Neil J . Gillespie, Case No.
20133090(5), initiated on the complaint of Ryan Christopher Rodems.
Complaint of Neil J . Gillespie against Danielle Nicole Parsons, File No. 2014-30,525 (09A).
Notice of Assignment of Investigating Member and/or Panel, September 2, 2014. (Exhibit D)
My request to the Senate J udiciary Committee for a hearing for the Nomination of Arthur
Lee Bentley III for United States Attorney, and request to present testimony (enclosed)
My request to the U.S. Post Office for the Postal Inspection Service to prosecute mail fraud
in the fraud or impairment of Petition No. 12-7747, a legitimate government activity, 18
U.S.C. 371, a conspiracy against my rights, 18 U.S.C. 241, and a deprivation of my rights
under color of law, 18 U.S.C. 242, by Pam Bondi, Attorney General of Florida, et al.
Fraud or impairment of SCOTUS Petition No. 12-7747 by Florida Chief J ustice Ricky
Polston, J udge Claudia Rickert Isom, and Florida Bar President Gwynne Alice Young, see
my letter August 28, 2014 to Mr. Pimentel Storbeck/Pimentel & Associates, Inc. (enclosed)
6. In compliance with Rule 9.300(d)(10), I request the Supreme Court toll time. A separate
request to toll time accompanies this motion.
7. Clerk J ohn Tomasino emailed me August 26, 2014 9:15 AM (Exhibit E):
Mr. Gillespie,
In the sixth paragraph of your August 25, 2014 letter, you ask for my advice on whether
Rule 1-14.1(a) Access To Records might be useful in this instance as an add on to the
Rule 1-14.1(a) request submitted to you. I am unable to offer any advice, as the Clerks
role is simply ministerial. I regret I am unable to assist you further.
Sincerely,
J ohn Tomasino
8. The August 25, 2014 letter referred to by Mr. Tomasino is with Exhibit E.
9. Clerk J ohn Tomasino emailed me August 27, 2014 at 8:50 AM (Exhibit F):
Mr. Gillespie,
3
In the second to last paragraph of your first attachment, you make references to SC14-
1637, and appear to be making requests regarding that case. Im unsure if you intend your
email to serve as an official request, so I wanted to explain that any requests related to
SC14-1637 must be made through a proper filing. There are three ways to file on a case:
1) By carrier delivery; 2) by hand delivery; and/or 3) by filing through the E-Filing
Portal. Our office cannot accept case related filings via email. You may register for an
account at this website:
https://www.myflcourtaccess.com/default.aspx
Your email received on Tuesday, September 26, 2014 (sic), and four attachments will be
placed in our miscellaneous file and no action will be taken on those items.
10. My email, the four attached letters referenced by Mr. Tomasino, and my letter to Mr.
Tomasino, are enclosed. The date was August 26, 2014. (Not September 26, 2014).
WHEREFORE, I respectfully move the Supreme Court to extend time for 33 days to and
including October 14, 2014 to file a proper petition for writ of mandamus, and proper motion to
proceed in forma pauperis, so that I may obtain counsel of my choice.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED September 11, 2014.
Neil J . Gillespie, petitioner pro se
8092 SW 115
th
Loop
Ocala, Florida 34481
Telephone: (352) 854-7807
Certificate of Service
I HEREBY CERTIFY that Petitioners Motion to Extend Time, and attachments, and
Petitioners Separate Request to Toll Time, were furnished VIA UPS No. 1Z64589FP290364263
on September 11, 2014, and by Email: tomasino@flcourts.org, to
Mr. J ohn A. Tomasino, Clerk
Supreme Court of Florida
500 South Duval Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1927
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a PDF copy of Petitioners Motion to Extend Time, and
attachments, and Petitioners Separate Request to Toll Time, has been furnished by email
September 11, 2014 to:
Adria E. Quintela, Director of Lawyer Regulation,
The Florida Bar, aquintel@flabar.org
J ohn F. Harkness, Executive Director,
The Florida Bar, jharkness@flabar.org
Neil J . Gillespie, petitioner pro se
8092 SW 115
th
Loop
Ocala, Florida 34481
Telephone: (352) 854-7807
~ u p r <tourt of jflortba
FRIDAY, AUGUST 22, 2014
CASE NO.: SC14-1637
NEIL J. GILLESPIE vs. THE FLORIDA BAR
Petitioner(s) Respondent(s)
Petitioner's letter, filed in this Court on August 20, has been treated as a
petition for writ of mandamus.
Petitioner is allowed to and including Septenlber 11, 2014, in which to file a
proper petition for writ of nlandamus; that complies with Florida Rule of Appellate
Procedure 9.1 00.
The failure to file a proper petition with this Court within the time provided
could result in the imposition of sanctions, including dismissal of this case. See
Fla. R. App. P. 9.410.
Please understand that once this case is dismissed, it may not be subject to
reinstatement.
A True Copy
Test:
tg
Served:
ADRIA E. QUINTELA
NEIL J. GILLESPIE
A
((ourt of jflortba
FRIDAY, AUGUST 22,2014
CASE NO.: SC14-1637
NEIL J. GILLESPIE vs. THE FLORIDA BAR
Petitioner(s) Respondent(s)
The jurisdiction of this Court was invoked by the filing of a Petition for Writ
of Mandamus; however, said petition was not accompanied by the $300.00 filing
fee or a proper motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis as required by Florida
Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.1 OO(b). The filing fee is due and payable at the time
of filing the petition. Petitioner is allowed to and including September 22, 2014, in
which to submit the filing fee or a proper motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis. The petition will not be submitted to the Court until receipt of the above.
Failure to submit the above referenced documents to this COllrt could result in the
imposition of sanctions, including dismissal of the petition.
Please understand that once this case is dismissed, it is not subject to
reinstatement.
A True Copy
Test:
...

Clerk., SupremeCourt
tg
Served:
ADRIA E. QUINTELA
NEIL J. GILLESPIE
B
This service enables you to add or subtract days, months and years to a date to calculate a past or future date.
Design changes: What is new and why?
From Thursday, September 11, 2014
Added 33 days
Result: Tuesday, October 14, 2014
Copyright Time and Date AS 19952014. All rights reserved.
http://www.timeanddate.com/date/dateadded.html?m1=9&d1=11&y1=2014&type=add&ay=&am=&aw=&ad=33
C
INTHESUPREMECOURTOFFLORIDA
(BeforeaGrievanceCon1mittee)
INRE: ComplaintbyNeilJ. GillespieagainstDanielleNicoleParsons
TheFloridaBarFileNo. 2014-30,525 (9A)
NOTICEOFASSIGNMENTOFINVESTIGATINGMEMBER
AND/ORPANEL
TO:
NeilJ. Gillespie BarryRodneyDavidson
8092SW115thLoop CounselforRespondent
Ocala,FL34481 BarclaysFinancialCenter
1111 BrickellAve. Floor25
Miami,FL33131-3101
Tele: (305)810-2500
bdavidson@hunton.com
Thecomplaintisherebyassignedto thefollowingmember(s)ofthecommitteefor
investigation:
JonMarshallOden FrankHarlanKillgoreJr.
BallJanikL.L.P. Killgore,Pearlman,Stamp,Ornstein&
201 E. PineSt. Ste.825 Squires
Orlando,FL3280-12764 P.O. Box 1913
Tele: (407)902-2077 Orlando,FL3280-21913
Tele: (407)425-1020
Noticeisgiventhatthiscasewillbeconsideredbythecommittee.
Respondentandcomplainantshallcontacttheinvestigatingmemberswithin 10
daysfromthedateofthisnoticeto discusstheinvestigationofthismatter.
DATEDthis2dayofSeptember,2014.
PatriciaAnnToroSavitz
D
Bar Counsel
The Florida Bar
1000 Legion Place, Suite 1625
Orlando, Florida 32801-1050
(407) 425-5424
psavitz@flabar.org
Copies furnished to:
Frank H. Killgore' Jr., Chair, Ninth Judicial Circuit Grievance Committee "A" and
Investigating Member
Jon Marshall Oden, Investigating Member
IiI I"'" .... ,., "i Iii d"" 'I r I f.
PUlis.

THE FLORIDA BAR


1000 LEGION PLACE, SUITE 1625 ..... /:!! QC:}
, - t ...
"i' ::;

ORLANDO, FL 32801-1050
i
..
oJ:
02 1P $ 000.480
I.tG
I: 0000838325 SEP 022014
r,c .en,-.... MAILED FROM ZIP CODE 32801
Visit our website: www.FLORIDABAR.org
Mr. Neil J. Gillespie
8092 Sw 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
3448i35E:792 'I' jJJJ. II JJ', If lui jlJl.. J, II IIJlJuh"'11',"J I'" IIII J'" ,IJ.

Neil Gillespie
From: "J ohn A. Tomasino" <tomasino@flcourts.org>
To: "'Neil Gillespie'" <neilgillespie@mfi.net>
Cc: "Tad David" <davidt@flcourts.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 9:15 AM
Subject: RE: OSCA Records, Florida Commission on Human Relations FCHR; Florida Unborn Victims of
Violence Act
Page 1of 1
9/11/2014
Mr. Gillespie,
In the sixth paragraph of your August 25, 2014 letter, you ask for my advice on whether Rule
1-14.1(a) Access To Records might be useful in this instance as an add on to the Rule 1-
14.1(a) request
submitted to you. I am unable to offer any advice, as the Clerks role is simply ministerial. I
regret I am unable to assist you further.

Sincerely,
John Tomasino


From: Neil Gillespie [mailto:neilgillespie@mfi.net]
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 4:57 PM
To: Tad David; John A. Tomasino; Jack Harkness; Gov. Rick Scott; Adam Putnam, Comm.; Jeff
Atwater, CFO; Pam Bondi, AG; FL Comm Human Relations; Michelle Wilson; Jodi Jones;
Gregory W. Coleman; John Thomas Berry; Paul Hill; Ramon A. Abadin; Public Information
Cc: Neil Gillespie
Subject: OSCA Records, Florida Commission on Human Relations FCHR; Florida Unborn
Victims of Violence Act


E
VIA Email: davidt@flcourts.org August 25, 2014
Thomas A. "Tad" David, General Counsel cc: J ohn A. Tomasino, Clerk, Florida
Office of the State Courts Administrator Supreme Court, tomasino@flcourts.org
Supreme Court Building
500 South Duval Street cc: J ohn F. Harkness, Executive Director
Tallahassee, FL 32399 The Florida Bar, jharkness@flabar.org
RE: Florida Commission on Human Relations FCHR, Public Records, Loyalty oaths,
876.05 Public employees; oath; Oath of Office, Article II, Section 5(b), Fla. Const.
Dear Mr. David:
Attached you will find my records request J uly 16, 2014 to Michelle Wilson, Executive Director,
Florida Commission on Human Relations (FCHR), and J odi J ones, Regulatory Specialist, in the
Disability Discrimination Complaint of Neil J . Gillespie submitted December 10, 2013 to the
Commission, FCHR No. 201400117. I also requested the current status of my complaint.
I requested records of the loyalty oath, as a recipient of public funds from the state of Florida,
that he/she supports the Constitution of the United States, and Florida, for Ms. Wilson and Ms.
J ones. I requested records of the Oath of Office for the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, and each
Commissioner of the FCHR required by Article II, Section 5(b), Fla. Const.
As of today I do not have a response from Ms. Wilson, Ms. J ones or anyone on behalf of the FCHR.
Mr. David, insofar as complaint FCHR No. 201400117 named employees of the OSCA, the
Office of State Court Administrator may have responsive records. If so, this is a request for those
records, and any other records about complaint FCHR No. 201400117.
Mr. Harkness, insofar as complaint FCHR No. 201400117 named the Executive Director of The
Florida Bar et al., The Bar may have responsive records. If so, this is a request for those records,
and any other records about complaint FCHR No. 201400117.
Mr. Tomasino, insofar as complaint FCHR No. 201400117 rises from my use of the Florida
Courts to petition the Government for a redress of grievances, please advise if Rule 1-14.1(a)
Access To Records might be useful in this instance as an add on to the Rule 1-14.1(a) request
submitted to you. The right to petition the Government for a redress of grievances is protected by
the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and Article I, Section 21, Access to Courts, of the
Florida Constitution. Please note, I still have additional information to submit under Rule 1-14.1.
The Florida legislature recently passed the Florida Unborn Victims of Violence Act, Bodily
injury to an unborn child, CS/HB 59: Offenses Against Unborn Children, found at these links,
https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2014/0059
https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2014/0162/?Tab=RelatedBills
http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2014/0059/BillText/er/PDF
Thomas A. "Tad" David, General Counsel August 25, 2014
Office of the State Courts Administrator Page - 2
In my view Florida does not have an adequate program of habilitation for persons born with
physical birth defects. Therefore, I believe a constitutional challenge is needed to amend the
Florida Unborn Victims of Violence Act to include all unborn children. Otherwise a law that
only protects certain unborn children in a few circumstances appears unconstitutional.
Nhu Nguyen, born in Vietnam, believes her birth defect was caused by Agent Orange, described in
Babbling about my birth defect on YouTube. Nhu was born with a cleft lip and palate, a serious
physical birth defect that may affect speech, hearing, breathing, eating, socializing and appearance.
Congenital craniofacial deformity may stigmatize a person; effects of stigma can last a lifetime.

Nhu Nguyen: Babbling about my birth defect Birth Defect Research for Children (BDRC)
http://youtu.be/g368cugbWZQ http://youtu.be/-Tmbm9mIJ wA
Ten million gallons of Agent Orange were sprayed during the Vietnam War. Eighteen different
birth defects have been service-connected in children of women veterans who served in Vietnam.
Attached you will find evidence of my physical disability, and evidence that Barker, Rodems &
Cook, PA investigated my claim of discrimination/negligence against the State of Florida and its
Vocational Rehabilitation Program (DVR). In turn Florida/DVRs discrimination prevented an
accurate assessment and mandated services under section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1974.
Evidence shows Mr. Rodems later used my confidential client information against me, client
information learned from his firms prior representation of me. Mr. Rodems breached, inter alia,
his duty to avoid a limitation on independent professional judgment, violated Rules 4-1.7, 4-1.9,
4-1.10; and the holding of, inter alia, McPartland v. ISI Inv. Services, Inc., 890 F.Supp. 1029,
M.D.Fla., 1995; and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v K.A.W, 575 So. 2d 630
(Fla. 1991). Unfortunately The Florida Bar failed to protect me, a consumer of legal and court
services, from Mr. Rodems, et al. Article V, Section 15, Attorneys; admission and discipline.
Thank you in advance for the courtesy of a response. Sincerely,
Neil J . Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop Telephone: (352) 854-7807
Ocala, Florida 34481 Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net attachments

UF could not maintain Dr. Kusiaks photo of my CPCF J ournal, unoperated adult
my speech obturator oral-nasal fistula, 1985 J uly 1992, Vol. 29 No.4, page 371
Mr. Rodems breached his duty to avoid a limitation on independent professional judgment, violated
Rules 4-1.7, 4-1.9, 4-1.10; McPartland v. ISI Inv. Services, Inc., 890 F.Supp. 1029, M.D.Fla., 1995
Transcript, March 3, 2006, page 6
4 MR. GILLESPIE: Now, you call here and just
5 marched into a tirade of insults.
6 MR. RODEMS: No, actually I haven't insulted
7 you at all. I've never said anything about you. I
8 just said that you don't really know the law
9 because you don't know how to practice law.
Transcript, March 3, 2006, page 7
24 MR. RODEMS: Didn't you at one time purchase a
25 car so that you could get the cash rebate to get
Transcript, March 3, 2006, page 8
1 some dental work done? We're going to get to the
2 discovery, anyhow, so just tell me, did that really
3 happen?
4 MR. GILLESPIE: What?
5 MR. RODEMS: Did you purchase a car so that
6 you could get the cash rebate to get some dental
7 work done?
8 MR. GILLESPIE: Listen, this is why you need
9 to be disqualified.
10 MR. RODEMS: No, I mean, that's -- because I
11 know that? Because I know that to be a fact?
12 MR. GILLESPIE: You know it to be a fact from
13 your previous representation of me.
14 MR. RODEMS: Well, you know, see that's --
15 MR. GILLESPIE: If it is -- if it's a fact,
16 anyway.
17 MR. RODEMS: You need to study the rules and
18 regulations of the Florida Bar because when you
19 make --
20 MR. GILLESPIE: I think, I think I bought a
21 car so I would have something to drive. I don't
22 know why you buy cars, but that's why I bought it.
Transcript, March 3, 2006, page 9
MR. RODEMS: Okay. Well, I just want to be
20 clear because I understand that in talking with you
21 it's very important to be precise because you don't
22 really have a good command of the language that,
23 you know, lawyers speak.


415-13
Rev. ]-8]
AMERICAN ONCOLOGIC HOSPITAL
CHART COpy PROGRESS REPORT
Notll prairllssofcaslI. complications. chanilllIn dlaposls
condition on dlscharill.Instructions to patlllnt
GILLESPIE, Neil #74123
7/22/85
The patient is a 29 year old white male referred by Dr. Carver
who is status post left unilateral 'Class IV lip and palate repair
at approximately age two years old. He is unclear about the details
of the degree of his defects, the surgical procedures, who performed
this, or exactly where it was done. Apparently, after the initial
bout of surgeries to repair the lip and hard and soft palate, he had
no further surgical intervention. He had no ongoing follow-up for
this problem. At approximately age 13 to 14 years old, he underwent
orthodontic treatment at Temple University Hospital's Dental School
and this ultimately resulted in the placement of a retainer with a
prosthetic left lateral incisor. He has worn this since that time.
He notices drainage of food into the left nasal floor. His left and
right nostrils are opened, although the left is somewhat stuffy and
occluded.
His main concerns upon presentation are related to the persistent
cleft in the left alveolus, the draining fistula, and the possibility
of foregoing the need fOD a prosthetic device. In addition, however,
it is obvious on confronting the patient that he has a moderate amount
of nasal deformity, flattening of the left side in the premaxillary
region, and lip distortion, particularly at the vermilion. In
addition, the patient has a significantly hypernasal speech pattern
with ~ v o u s velopharyngeal incompetence.
On physical examination beginning externally, the patient has
a slightly large nose with a small dorsal hump. The size of the nose
is slightly larger than proportional to his face, although not
exaggeratedly so. The right alar dome is full. The left alar
cartilage is posteriorly and laterally displaced and somewhat
hypoplastic compared to the left side. The left alar base is
also laterally displaced. The nostril sill is flattened, and there
is an obvious fistula between the distal nasal floor and the oral
cavity. The left columella, likewise, is somewhat hypoplastic and
twisted. The upper lip scar is well healed and appears to be a
LeMesurier or Tennison-Randall type repair. The upper lip tubercle
is preserved, but the vermilion border is somewhat irregular.
Length appears, however, to be satisfactory. There is a-lateral
orbicularis bulge of the left upper lip. Internally, there is a wide
cleft of the left alveolar ridge at the level of the lateral incisor
with a fistula into the nasal floor. This runs posteriorly and nearly
to the end of the secondary palate. The soft palate has a linear scar.
it is very short, and there is lateral movement but no central movement
of note.
continued...


GILLESPIE, Neil
Page Two .
7/22/85
My impression and recommendation to the patient generated
three specific areas of interest. One relates to the scar revision
of his upper nose and the relationships of his nasal tip, nose,
and secondary deformities in this area. The second area of interest
in importance is the alveolar cleft with the naso-oral fistula.
The third area is the palate with obvious velopharyngeal incompetence
and a foreshort and scarred palate.
My initial recommendations will be that the patient undergo
orthodontic evaluation. I will arrange for him to see Dr. Rosario
Mayro for evaluation as well as x-rays to assess his occlusal
relationships. It also should be noted that he, in general, had
a fairly satisfactory occlusal relationship.with some lateral collapse
and crossbite on the minor segment on the left and evaluate his
adequacy as a candidate for bone I think he would
qualify. Subsequent to this, I will have him see Dr. Harvey Rosen
concerning the actual surgical procedure and also he will be seen by
Miss Marilyn Cohen, a speech pathologist with special interest in
patients having cleft lip and palate for an evaluation concerning
feasibility of posteropharyngeal flap in a patient of this age group.
Concerning the external revisions, this can be accomplished concerning
the upper lip, possibly at the same time as the fistula closure with
orlllcularis redirection, a revision of the nostril sill and the
lateral alar base, and also possibly tip rhinoplasty or this can
be accomplished at a later date with a formal rhinoplasty in concert
with other procedures. In addition, the vermilion border should be
repaired. This can be done by Z-plasty technique.
The patient, therefore, will be seen by the consultants and a
general plan with timing'for surgery, etc., will be made. We will
arrange to make these arrangements and follow-up with the patient.
No letter.
M.D.
econstructive Surgery
JK:bsm
T--8/1/85
D--7/23/85
ep s1ak,


BARKER,RODEMS& COOK
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIAllON
AlTORNEYS AT LAW
CHRIS A. BARKER
Telephone 813/4891001
300 West Platt Street, Suite 150
RYAN CHRISTOPHER RODEMS
Facsimile 813/4891008
WILLIAM J. COOK Tampa, Florida 33606
March27,2001
Neil1. Gillespie
ApartmentC-2
1121 BeachDriveNE
St. Petersburg,Florida33701-1434
Re: VocationalRehabilitation
DearNeil:
Iamenclosingthematerialyou providedtous. Wehave reviewedthemand, unfortunately,
wearenotin apositionto representyou for any claims you may have. Pleaseunderstandthatour
decisiondoesnotmeanthatyourclaimslackmerit,andanotherattorneymightwishtorepresentyou.
If youwishtoconsultwithanotherattorney, werecommendthatyoudo soimmediatelyasastatute
oflimitationswill applytoanyclaimsyoumay have. Asyouknow, astatuteoflimitationsis alegal
deadlineforfiling alawsuit. Thankyoufortheopportunitytoreviewyourmaterials.
William1. Cook
WJC/mss
Enclosures

Neil J. Gillespie
1121 Beach Drive NE, Apt. C-2
St. Petersburg, Florida 33701-1434
Telephone and Fax: (727) 823-2390
March 22, 2001
William 1. Cook, Attorney at Law
Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA
300 West Platt Street, Suite 150
Tampa, Florida 33606
Dear Bill,
Thank you for agreeing to consider my claim of discrimination/negligence against
the State ofFlorida and its Vocational Rehabilitation Program. Enclosed please find the
following:
1. My Second and Third (final) Amended Petitions for Administrative Hearing.
These documents set forth much ofmy claim.
2. My Motionfor Summary Final Order. The Administrative Law Judge (Johnston)
failed to rule on my motion. The state's response was to try and expand the issues and
compel another psychiatric exam. Seeing this was going nowhere, I motioned to
withdrawal the request. (See my motion, the order and final order, enclosed).
3. October 5, 1998 letter from Douglas Ligibel, Fla. DVR. This "addendum" letter
sets forth the state's claim that I was not cooperative as a reason to deny services.
4. Binder with the Fla. Vocational Rehabilitation web site printed out. (not current)
5. Photo ofme taken June 6, 1994 (at 150 pounds) before afilicted with depression
(current weight 290 pounds).
6. A brief medical history relevant to VR.
In essence, the state discriminated against me based on disability and refused
services as set forth in the petitions. As a result I became severely depressed. The state is
negligent because its own psychologist (Dr. Justice) warned ofmy depression risk, a
warning the state ignored. The state also misdiagnosed my condition(s). There may be a
breach ofprivacy relevant to my file. During the time referenced by Mr. Ligibel in his
October 5, 1998 letter (item 3, above) my contact with the state was monitored by a
private lawyer, Mark Kamleiter, who disputes the allegations contained therein.

en t
Ps. Bill, these are mostly original documents, please copy and return ifneeded. Thanks.

Neil Gillespie
From: "J ohn A. Tomasino" <tomasino@flcourts.org>
To: "'Neil Gillespie'" <neilgillespie@mfi.net>
Cc: "Tad David" <davidt@flcourts.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 8:50 AM
Subject: RE: Supreme Court Case SC14-1637
Page 1of 1
9/11/2014
Mr. Gillespie,

In the second to last paragraph of your first attachment, you make references to SC14-1637,
and appear to be making requests regarding that case. Im unsure if you intend your email
to serve as an official request, so I wanted to explain that any requests related to SC14-1637
must be made through a proper filing. There are three ways to file on a case: 1) By carrier
delivery; 2) by hand delivery; and/or 3) by filing through the E-Filing Portal. Our office
cannot accept case related filings via email. You may register for an account at this website:
https://www.myflcourtaccess.com/default.aspx

Your email received on Tuesday, September 26, 2014, and four attachments will be placed in
our miscellaneous file and no action will be taken on those items.

From: Neil Gillespie [mailto:neilgillespie@mfi.net]
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 7:04 PM
To: John A. Tomasino; Jack Harkness; Tad David
Cc: Paul Hill; John Thomas Berry; Jack Harkness; Gregory W. Coleman; Adria E Quintela;
Ramon A. Abadin; Neil Gillespie
Subject: Supreme Court Case SC14-1637


F