Appendix 1, Appellant's Notice of Appeal FSC18-116

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
NEIL J. GILLESPIE, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS FORMER

TRUSTEE OF THE TERMINATED GILLESPIE FAMILY
FLORIDA SUPREME COURT
RECEIVED, 1/17/2018 4:53 AM, Joanne P. Simmons, Fifth District Court of Appeal
LIVING TRUST AGREEMENT DATED FEBRUARY 10, 1997,
Appellant,
v. CASE NO. 5D17-2665
REVERSE MORTGAGE SOLUTIONS, INC.,
Appellee.
________________________/
APPELLANT’S NOTICE OF APPEAL

01/17/2018
Appellant Neil J. Gillespie, an indigent non-lawyer, unable to obtain
adequate counsel, a consumer of legal and court services affecting interstate
commerce, a consumer of personal, family and household goods and services,

RECEIVED
consumer transactions in interstate commerce, a person with disabilities, and a
vulnerable adult, henceforth in the first person, reluctantly appears pro se, and files
APPELLANT’S NOTICE OF APPEAL, and states:
1. I give notice of appeal to the Florida Supreme Court of this Court’s Order
entered December 29, 2017 that appears at Exhibit 1. The Order states:
ORDERED that Appellant’s December 8, 2017, Motion to Vacate This

Court’s Order of November 21, 2017, is denied. Failure to serve the Initial
Brief within 20 days of the date hereof will result in a dismissal without
further notice.
Panel: Judges Cohen, Wallis, and Eisnaugle
APPENDIX 1
2. APPELLANT’S MOTION TO VACATE THIS COURT’S ORDER OF
NOVEMBER 21, 2017 appears at Exhibit 2 and seeks to enforce, inter alia,
Rule 9.200, Fla. R. App. Pro. because The Record Is Not Complete.
3. Without a proper Record, I am unable to comply with this Court’s Order

entered December 29, 2017 (Exhibit 1) that requires me to serve the Initial Brief
within 20 days, which is tomorrow, January 18, 2018.
4. The Florida Constitution, Article V, Section 2(a) has a requirement that no

cause shall be dismissed because an improper remedy has been sought:
SECTION 2. Administration; practice and procedure.—

(a) The supreme court shall adopt rules for the practice and procedure in all
courts including the time for seeking appellate review, the administrative
supervision of all courts, the transfer to the court having jurisdiction of any
proceeding when the jurisdiction of another court has been improvidently
invoked, and a requirement that no cause shall be dismissed because an
improper remedy has been sought.
5. I move to toll time during the pendency of this appeal, 5D17-2665.
6. I move to toll time during the pendency of a related petition in the Supreme
Court of the United States, Petition No. 17-7053, including rehearing.
7. I move to toll time during the pendency of a related petition in the Supreme
Court of the United States, Petition No. 17-7054, including rehearing.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED January 17, 2018
Neil J. Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala, Florida 34481
Tel. 352-854-7807
Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net
2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY the names below were served by email today January 17, 2018.
Curtis Wilson, Esq. Colleen Murphy Davis, Asst. U.S. Attorney

McCalla Raymer Leibert Pierce, LLC United States Attorney’s Office, HUD Counsel
225 E. Robinson Street, Suite 155 Secretary, U.S. Dept. Housing/Urban Development
Orlando, FL 32801 400 N. Tampa Street, Suite 3200
Phone: (407) 674-1850; Fax: (321) 248-0420 Phone: 813-274-6000; Fax: 813-274-6358
Email: MRService@mrpllc.com Tampa, FL 33602
Email: MRService@mccalla.com Email: USAFLM.HUD@usdoj.gov
Fla. Bar No.: 77669 Email: Michalene.Y.Rowells@hud.gov
Justin R. Infurna, Esq., LL.M

The Infurna Law Firm, P.A.
Attorney for Defendants Mark Gillespie, Joetta Gillespie, Elizabeth Bauerle, Scott Bidgood.
121 South Orange Ave., Ste. 1500
Orlando, Florida 32801
Telephone: (800)-774-1560; Fax: (407)386-3419
Primary Email: justin@infurnalaw.com; Secondary Email: justininfurna@gmail.com
Development & Construction Corporation Oak Run Homeowners Association, Inc.

of America (DECCA), Priya Ghumman, (ORHA) c/o ORHA Board of Directors
Registered Agent, Name Changed: 11/04/2009 Email: orhaboard@yahoo.com
c/o Carol Olson, Vice President of Admin. Paul Pike, Registered Agent
Administration and Secretary-Treasurer Name Changed: 03/12/2014
10983 SW 89 Avenue, Ocala, FL 34481 11665 SW 72nd Circle, Ocala, FL 34476
Email: colson@deccahomes.com Address Changed: 03/12/2014
Neil J. Gillespie owns the property free and clear at 8092 SW 115th Loop, Ocala, FL 34481;
Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net; the Trust terminated on February 2, 2015, see attached. The
HECM reverse mortgage is void (borrower incompetence), and voidable (§ 10(b) 1934 Act).
Neil J. Gillespie and Mark Gillespie as Co-Trustees of the Gillespie Family Living Trust
Agreement dated February 10, 1997; the Trust terminated on February 2, 2015, see attached; c/o
Neil J. Gillespie, 8092 SW 115th Loop, Ocala, FL 34481, Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net
Unknown Settlors/Beneficiaries of The Gillespie Family Living Trust Agreement dated
February 10, 1997; NONE; the Trust Terminated February 2, 2015, see attached; c/o Neil J.
Gillespie, 8092 SW 115th Loop, Ocala, FL 34481, Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net
Neil J. Gillespie
3
Termination of the Gillespie Family Living Trust Agreement Dated February 10, 1997
STATE OF FLORIDA ) 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111

DAVID R EllSPERMANN CLERK & COMPTROLLER MARION co
) SS.: DATE: 02/03/2015 11 :55:32 AM
COUNTY OF MARION ) FILE #: 2015009748 OR BK 6161 PGS 1844-1845
AFFIDAVIT REC FEES: $18.50 INDEX FEES: $0.00
DDS: $0 MDS: $0 INT: $0
BEFORE ME, this day personally appeared NEIL J. GILLESPIE, who upon being duly
sworn deposed upon oath as follows:
I. My name is Neil J. Gillespie. I am over eighteen years of age. This affidavit is given on
personal knowledge unless otherwise expressly stated.
2. I am sole Trustee of the Gillespie Family Living Trust Agreement Dated February 10,
1997 (hereinafter "Trust").
\ \
oeZ=::).. My Florida residential homestead property is the sole asset of the Trust, property address
..
" ~:.
8092 SW 115th Loop, Ocala, Florida 34481, Marion County, Florida, (the "property") where I
have lived in the property continuously and uninterruptedly since February 9, 2005, Tax ID No.
7013-007-00 I, legal description:
Lot(s) ], Block G, OAK RUN WOODSIDE TRACT, according to the Plat thereof as
recorded in Plat Book 2 at Page(s) 106 through I ]2, inclusive of the Public Records of
Marion County, Florida.
4. Pursuant to my authority as Trustee of the Trust, and acting in that capacity, I transferred
the remaining trust property to the beneficiary, myself, on January 14, 2015.
5. Pursuant to my authority as Trustee of the Trust, and acting in that capacity, I hereby
terminate the Trust as provided by Fla. Stat. § 736.0414, and Article V, the Trust. The total fair
market value of the assets of the Trust is zero. The Trust served its intended purpose of
transferring the property to the beneficiary without going through probate.
6. Pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 736.0414 Modification or tenn ination of uneconomic trust. (1)
After notice to the qualified beneficiaries, the trustee of a trust consisting of trust property
Book6161/Page1844 CFN#2015009748 Page 1 of 2

having a total value less than $50,000 may terminate the trust if the trustee concludes that the
value of the trust. property is insufficient to justify the cost of administration.
FURTHER AFFIANT SA YETH NOT,
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me, this 2nd day of February, 2015,
1=l--'bL
- ti~u II~O SlD o;tl 0
by Neil J. Gillespie, who is personally known to me, or who has produced . as
. identification and· states that he is. the person who made this affidavit and that its co~tents are
truthful to the best of his knowledge, information and belief.
r
Notary Public State of Florida
(SEAL) Angelica Cruz
My Commission EE067986 NOTAR UBLIC
Expires 02127/2015
~(?JI(s2. Lr0L
Print Na of Notary PublIc
My Commission Expires: --2J......;;J;_~-=-

.._'_)5 _
Book6161/Page1845 CFN#2015009748 Page 2 of 2

FIFTH DISTRICT
NEIL J. GILLESPIE, INDIVIDUALLY,

AND AS FORMER TRUSTEE OF THE
TERMINATED GILLESPIE FAMILY
LIVING TRUST AGREEMENT DATED
FEBRUARY 10, 1997,
Appellant,
v. CASE NO. 5D17-2665
REVERSE MORTGAGE
SOLUTIONS, INC.,
Appellee.
________________________/
DATE: December 29, 2017
BY ORDER OF THE COURT:
Court’s Order of November 21, 2017, is denied. Failure to serve the Initial Brief within
20 days of the date hereof will result in a dismissal without further notice.
I hereby certify that the foregoing is

(a true copy of) the original Court order.
cc:
Curtis A Wilson Neil J Gillespie
1
FIFTH DISTRICT
NEIL J. GILLESPIE,
INDIVIDUALLY AND AS
RECEIVED, 12/8/2017 9:32 PM, Joanne P. Simmons, Fifth District Court of Appeal
FORMER TRUSTEE OF
THE TERMINATED
GILLESPIE FAMILY LIVING
TRUST AGREEMENT,
Appellant,
v. CASE NO. 5D17-2665
REVERSE MORTGAGE
SOLUTIONS, INC.,
Appellee.
________________________/
APPELLANT’S MOTION TO VACATE THIS COURT’S

ORDER OF NOVEMBER 21, 2017
Appellant Neil J. Gillespie, individually, and as former Trustee (F.S. Ch. 736 Part
III) of the terminated Gillespie Family Living Trust Agreement Dated February 10,
1997 (“Terminated Trust”), an indigent non-lawyer, unable to obtain adequate
counsel, a consumer of legal and court services affecting interstate commerce, a
consumer of personal, family and household goods and services, consumer
transactions in interstate commerce, a person with disabilities, a vulnerable adult,
reluctantly appears pro se, henceforth in the first person, files Appellant’s Motion
To Vacate This Court’s Order of November 21, 2017, and states:
2
APPELLANT’S MOTION TO VACATE THIS COURT’S ORDER OF NOVEMBER 21, 2017
1. I hereby move to vacate this Court’s Order entered November 21, 2017.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. The Record Is Not Complete. (Rule 9.200, Fla. R. App. Pro.)

B. A Corrected Petition For Writ of Certiorari Was Delivered to The Supreme
Court of The Untied States In A Related Case, FLSC SC17-1570.
C. A Corrected Petition For Writ of Certiorari Was Delivered to The Supreme
Court of The Untied States In A Related Case, FLSC SC17-1572.
D. The Appellant Has To And Including Monday, February 12, 2018, To File
A Petition For Writ of Certiorari In A Related Case, FLSC SC17-1361.
E. The Fifth District Court of Appeal Has Denied The Appellant Due Process.
A. The Record Is Not Complete. (Rule 9.200, Fla. R. App. Pro.)
2. On November 21, 2017 this Court entered the Order at Exhibit 1 that states,
ORDERED that Appellant’s November 6, 2017, Response is treated as a

motion to correct the record and is denied. Appellant has up to and including
December 8, 2017, to serve the Initial Brief.
3. The Order at Exhibit 1 was entered by a panel of three judges:
CHIEF JUDGE JAY PAUL COHEN

JUDGE FREDERIC RAND WALLIS
JUDGE ERIC J. EISNAUGLE
4. My response November 6, 2017 was “APPELLANT’S RESPONSE TO
SHOW CAUSE ORDER OF OCT-27-2017”. It was not a motion to correct the
record. Therefore I was denied due process to submit a proper motion.
5. As of today, the Record does not comply with the governing law, including:
a. The Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 9.200, The Record; and
b. The Florida Supreme Court Standards for Electronic Access to the courts
Adopted June 2009, Adopted modifications November 2016. (“Standards for
Electronic Access to the Courts, Version 17.0, November 2016”).
2
6. Because, inter alia, the Record does not comply with either Rule 9.200 or
the Standards for Electronic Access to the Courts, Version 17.0, November 2016,
I am unable to serve the Initial Brief up to and including December 8, 2017.
7. Rule 9.200(e), Duties of Appellant or Petitioner, states:

Duties of Appellant or Petitioner. The burden to ensure that the record is
prepared and transmitted in accordance with these rules shall be on the
petitioner or appellant. Any party may enforce the provisions of this rule by
motion.
8. On November 21, 2017, when the Court entered the Order at Exhibit 1, I
was in the process of complying with Rule 9.200(e), Duties of Appellant or
Petitioner, and preparing a motion to correct the record.
9. Chief Judge Cohen knew, or should have known, I was preparing a motion
to correct the record, from my email to him on November 14, 2017, and to:
• Judge Jay P. Cohen, Chief Judge, Fifth District Court of Appeal

• Joanne P. Simmons, Clerk, Fifth District Court of Appeal
• David R. Ellspermann, Marion Co. Clerk of Court & Comptroller
• Gregory C. Harrell, General Counsel to Clerk Ellspermann
• Curtis Wilson, Esq., McCalla Raymer Leibert Pierce, LLC
• Colleen Murphy Davis, Asst. U.S. Attorney. U.S. Attorney’s Office,
HUD Counsel Secretary, U.S. Dept. Housing/Urban Development
• Justin R. Infurna, Esq., LL.M, The Infurna Law Firm, P.A.
• Development & Construction Corporation of America (DECCA)
• Oak Run Homeowners Association, Inc. (ORHA)
• Neil J. Gillespie; and the fake trust parties, and the fake unknown parties.
10. My email of November 14, 2017 appears at Exhibit 2, with 5 attachments:
• 2017, 11-13-17, EMAIL PRR response from Greg Harrell

• Service List November 14, 2017
3
• PRR to Clerk re Record on Appeal

• RULE 9.200. THE RECORD
• Updated-E-Access-Standards-November-2016-v17-clean
11. My email of November 14, 2017 states in relevant part,
• The Clerk mailed a copy of the Record on Appeal to the Oak Run
Homeowners Association, Inc., to a wrong address, the address of my
former attorney Robert Stermer, who is now an adverse party.
• The Clerk did not mail, or "electronically transmit the record to the
appellate court and serve copies of the Index to the Record on Appeal on
all parties." Mark Gillespie was not served, either personally or through
counsel Mr. Infurna. Elizabeth Bauerle nka Elizabeth Bidgood (who the
Clerk wrongly designated as Elizabeth Bidwood) was not served, either
personally or through counsel Mr. Infurna. Also of note, the Index to the
Record on Appeal does not show any trust parties, no unknown parties,
and no spouse parties, and no service to trust parties, unknown parties, or
spouse parties. If those are not legitimate parties, the Clerk must state so
on the record.
• In my response to show cause in 5D17-2665, I inadvertently used an

outdated version of the Florida Supreme Court Standards for Electronic
Access to the Courts (Version 14, May 2014). I believe the current
version is Version 17, November 2016, and doubles the size of a
permitted filing from 25 MB to 50 MB. I still believe the file with 3,467
pages exceeds 50 MB. In any event, the file does not download. Until I
can download the file, I cannot ensure that the record is prepared and
transmitted in accordance with Rule 9.200. (Rule 9.200(e)). Until I can
download the file I cannot know what provisions of Rule 9.200 must be
enforced by motion to correct or supplement the Record on Appeal (Rule
9.200(e) and (f)).
• The Record on Appeal states, "Attorney For Appellant: NEIL J.

GILLESPIE 8092 S.W. 115TH LOOP OCALA FL 34471". You know I
am not an "attorney". I am an indigent non-lawyer, age 61, unable to
obtain adequate counsel, a consumer of legal and court services affecting
interstate commerce, a consumer of personal, family and household
goods and services, consumer transactions in interstate commerce, a
4
person with disabilities, a vulnerable adult, and reluctantly appearing pro

se. Also, the Clerk put the wrong zip code for me; the correct zip is
34481.
• Also, the Index to the Record on Appeal shows the Clerk’s failure to
properly designate a description to court records, see the 5th page, that
contains 25 or so court records simply called "Exhibit" with no further
designation. This bad practice is rampant throughout the docket. I believe
the Clerk’s docket must be corrected in accordance with 28.13 Papers
and electronic filings. "The clerk of the circuit court must maintain all
papers and electronic filings in the clerk’s office with the utmost care..."
and 28.22205 Electronic filing process... "...statewide standards for
electronic filing to be used by the clerks of court to implement electronic
filing. The standards should specify the required information for the
duties of the clerks of court and the judiciary for case management."
before the Index and the Record on Appeal can be filed.
• Therefore I must file an amended Response to Show Cause Order of Oct-

27-2017. [Correction: A motion to correct the record, Rule 9.200(e)]. I
am advising the Clerk and Chief Judge of the 5thDCA thereof by this
email.
12. It has come to my attention that the Rule 9.200 Record provided by Clerk
Ellspermann, through the 5thDCA on October 10, 2017, is approximately 152 MB,
which is over 3 times the size permitted under Standards for Electronic Access to
the Courts, Version 17.0, November 2016, 3.1.1. Size of Filing: 50 megabytes (50
MB) in size.
3.1.1. Size of Filing

A single submission, whether consisting of a single document or multiple
documents, shall not exceed 50 megabytes (50 MB) in size.
13. Since Clerk Ellspermann provided the Record on October 10, 2017,
additional substantial documents have been filed.
5
14. The Marion County Clerk’s public online docket in the lower tribunal, case
number 13CA000115AX, shows a 2 page filing, DOC-563 on 11/16/2017,
“AMENDED COVER SHEET FOR RECORD ON APPEAL”. DOC-563 has not
been served on me or any other party, or their counsel, that I know about. DOC-
563 is marked on the online docket as an “Unofficial Document”.
15. Chief Judge Cohen is responsible for the administrative supervision of the
Fifth District Court of Appeal. Article V, Section 2(c), Florida Constitution.
ARTICLE V, JUDICIARY
(c) A chief judge for each district court of appeal shall be chosen by a
majority of the judges thereof or, if there is no majority, by the chief justice.
The chief judge shall be responsible for the administrative supervision of the
court.
16. With malice aforethought, on November 21, 2017, Chief Judge Cohen
entered the Order at Exhibit 1 with the intent to deny me due process. Chief Judge
Cohen entered the Order with Judge Wallis and Judge Eisnaugle.
B. A Corrected Petition For Writ of Certiorari Was Delivered to The

Supreme Court of The Untied States In A Related Case, FLSC SC17-1570.
17. My corrected petition for writ of certiorari was delivered to the Supreme
Court of the United States in a related case, Florida Supreme Court Case Number
SC17-1570, and appears on the Florida Supreme Court website at this URL/link:
Filing # 64945317 E-Filed 12/04/2017 11:12:03 PM

RECEIVED, 12/04/2017 11:13:36 PM, Clerk, Supreme Court
https://efactssc-public.flcourts.org/casedocuments/2017/1570/2017-1570_miscdoc_342046_e99.pdf
6
18. My petition in SC17-1570 alleges at the Statement of the Case, in part,
On July 18, 2017 at 7:24 AM in The Florida Supreme Court, I filed what
amounts to an Emergency Petition for Temporary Injunction under Rule
1.610(a), Fla R Civ Pro.
EMERGENCY PETITION TO CANCEL NON-JURY TRIAL 10.00 AM

TODAY Filing # 59132663 E-Filed 07/18/2017 07:24:12 AM
My Emergency Petition was supported by 9 Appendices, including 4

Affidavits, including,
Appendix A - Defendants’ Emergency Motion to Cancel Hearing July 18, 2017

Appendix B - Defendants’ Notice of Filing U.S. Supreme Court Petition and Response.
Appendix 1 Order Dismissal Mar-31-2017, Notice Appeal Mar-27-2017
Appendix 2 Notice of Filing Federal Civil Rights Complaint
Appendix 3 US Supreme Court Clerk's reply letter Mr Higgins Oct-19-2016
Appendix 4 Affidavit of Neil Gillespie re Dr. Kassels Jun-12-2017
Appendix 5, Affidavit of Neil J Gillespie of Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)
Appendix 6 Affidavit of Neil J Gillespie HECM Age Limits
Appendix 7 Affidavit of Neil J Gillespie - Defenses and Claims In Recoupment
The Florida Supreme Court acted On July 18, 2017 as a court of first view,
and not a court of review, when it entered an Order in SC17-1321 wrongly
sending the case to the 5thDCA as a petition for writ of prohibition:
Petitioner has submitted an “Emergency Petition to Cancel Non-Jury

Trial 10:00 AM Today,” which this Court has treated as a petition for
writ of prohibition. The petition for writ of prohibition is hereby
transferred, pursuant to Harvard v. Singletary, 733 So. 2d 1020 (Fla.
1999), to the Fifth District Court of Appeal. The transfer of this case
should not be construed as an adjudication or comment on the merits
of the petition, nor as a determination that the transferee court has
jurisdiction or that the petition has been properly denominated as a
petition for writ of prohibition. The transferee court should not
interpret the transfer of this case as an indication that it must or should
reach the merits of the petition. The transferee court shall treat the
petition as if it had been originally filed there on the date it was filed
in this Court and is instructed to consider expediting the petition as it
appears to be time sensitive based upon the allegations; however, a
determination to expedite consideration is at the discretion
7
of the transferee court. Any determination concerning whether a filing

fee shall be applicable to this case shall be made by the transferee
court. Any and all pending motions in this case are hereby deferred to
the transferee court.
Any future pleadings filed regarding this case should be filed in the
above mentioned district court at 300 South Beach Street, Daytona
Beach, Florida 32114.
Clearly my EMERGENCY PETITION TO CANCEL NON-JURY TRIAL

10.00 AM TODAY did not seek to remove person from office suggested by
a petition for writ of prohibition. My petition sought injunctive relief, to
cancel the non-jury trial for 10:00 AM July 18, 2017.
On August 02, 2017 the 5thDCA entered a one-sentence Order in

Case No. 5D17-2273:
ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Prohibition, filed July 18,
2017, is denied on the merits.
My pleading was not a petition for writ of prohibition. The ruling by the
Panel of Judges Orfinger, Torpy, and Eisnaugle, did not meet the
requirements of Florida law, or Constitutional Due Process. Under Florida
law, a judge has a duty to determine and decide issues.
COURTS AND JUDGES, 12A FlaJur2d

§144 Duty to determine and decide issues1
The power of the judiciary is not merely to rule on cases but also to decide
them, subject to review only by superior courts.[fn1] Thus, when a court
properly acquires jurisdiction, it must fully perform and exhaust its
jurisdiction,[fn2] determine the controversy, and decide every issue or
question properly arising in the case [fn3] and render a decision.[fn4]
1
[fn1] Bush v. Schiavo, 885 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2004), cert. denied, 125 S Ct. 1086 (U.S. 2005).
[fn2] King v. State, 143 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 1962); Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709, 109 So. 677
(1926); Schoenrock v. Ballard, 185 So. 2d 760 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1966).
[fn3] Wade v. Clower, 94 Fla. 817, 114 So. 548 (1927); Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709, 109 So.
677 (1926); Schoenrock v. Ballard, 185 So. 2d 760 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1966).
[fn4] King v. State, 143 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 1962).
8
I appealed the decision in Case No. 5D17-2273 back to the Florida Supreme
Court in SC17-1750, which dismissed the case as follows:
This case is hereby dismissed. This Court lacks jurisdiction to review

an unelaborated decision from a district court of appeal that is issued
without opinion or explanation or that merely cites to an authority that
is not a case pending review in, or reversed or quashed by, this Court.
See Wells v. State, 132 So. 3d 1110 (Fla. 2014); Jackson v. State, 926
So. 2d 1262 (Fla. 2006); Gandy v. State, 846 So. 2d
1141 (Fla. 2003); Stallworth v. Moore, 827 So. 2d 974 (Fla. 2002);
Harrison v. Hyster Co., 515 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 1987); Dodi Publ’g Co.
v. Editorial Am. S.A., 385 So. 2d 1369 (Fla. 1980); Jenkins v. State,
385 So. 2d 1356 (Fla. 1980).
No motion for rehearing or reinstatement will be entertained by the
Court.
The Florida Supreme Court knows, or should know, that my pleading in

essence sought injunctive relief, not a writ of prohibition.
The Florida Supreme Court knows, or should know, The Florida

Constitution, Article V, Section 2(a) has a requirement that no cause shall be
dismissed because an improper remedy has been sought, and transfer to the
proper court:

(a) The supreme court shall adopt rules for the practice and procedure
in all courts including the time for seeking appellate review, the
administrative supervision of all courts, the transfer to the court
having jurisdiction of any proceeding when the jurisdiction of another
court has been improvidently invoked, and a requirement that no
cause shall be dismissed because an improper remedy has been
sought.
The Florida Supreme Court knows, or should know that under Florida law, a
judge has a duty to determine and decide issues.
9

The Florida Supreme Court engaged in fraud upon the court On August 25,
2017, when the Court entered two different Orders that dismissed this
appeal, Case No. SC17-1570; each Order shows a different petitioner, and
each Order each shows the wrong trial judge. See
PETITIONERS’ MOTION TO CORRECT FRAUD UPON THE COURT

Filing # 61193760 E-Filed 08/31/2017 12:45:30 PM
that accompanies this petition for writ of certiorari. In my view the Florida
Supreme Court’s Fraud Upon the Court is evidence of wrongdoing if not
criminality.
I was denied due process during a non-jury trial the Florida Appellate and
Supreme Courts failed to stop on July 18, 2017, whereupon I suffered injury
and loss of rights, see the Affidavit of Neil J. Gillespie Non-Jury Trial July
18, 2017.
19. My SCOTUS petition in FLSC SC17-1570 has 6 questions presented:
1. Does the Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantee

the right to a trial by jury in a state court residential home foreclosure of a
federal Home Equity Conversion Mortgage [12 USC § 1715z–20; 24 CFR
Part 206] also called a HECM reverse mortgage?
2
10
2. Does a disabled homeowner age 61 have a right to assistance of counsel

under the federal Older Americans Act, 42 U.S. Code Chapter 35 -
PROGRAMS FOR OLDER AMERICANS, for old age, and disability
including Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and Traumatic Brain
Injury (TBI)?
3. Can the Civil Rights Division, Voting Section, U.S. Department of Justice
ignore the enclosed Voting Section complaint against Florida’s rigged
judicial elections?
4. Can the U.S. Department of Justice deny on May 18, 2017 my FOIA into
the mental health screening imposed by the Florida Supreme Court on bar
applicants, because the records you have requested pertain to an ongoing law
enforcement proceeding?
5. Can the U.S. Supreme Court ignore wrongdoing in Petition 12-7747 for a
writ of certiorari as stated in the enclosed letter of Mr. Clayton Higgins on
October 19, 2016?
6. Do time limits on civil litigation have any meaning? Pursuant to Fla. R.

Jud. Admin. 2.250(a)(1)(B), the time standard for a civil trial case is 18
months from filing to final disposition. Non-jury cases — 12 months (filing
to final disposition)
C. A Corrected Petition For Writ of Certiorari Was Delivered to The

Supreme Court of The Untied States In A Related Case, FLSC SC17-1572.
20. My corrected petition for writ of certiorari was delivered to the Supreme
Court of the United States in a related case, Florida Supreme Court Case Number
SC17-1572, and appears on the Florida Supreme Court website at this URL/link:
Filing # 64945369 E-Filed 12/04/2017 11:31:48 PM

RECEIVED, 12/04/2017 11:33:31 PM, Clerk, Supreme Court
https://efactssc-public.flcourts.org/casedocuments/2017/1572/2017-1572_miscdoc_342047_e99.pdf
21. My petition in SC17-1572 alleges at the Statement of the Case, in part,
11
On April 7, 2017 I misfiled in the trial court, “Petition for Writ of

Prohibition - A Case of Original Jurisdiction To Remove Marion County
Circuit Court Judge Ann Melinda Craggs”.
On or about July 20, 2017 the trial court transmitted my 355 page petition to
the correct court, the Fifth District Court of Appeal. My petition has the
following parts:
PETITION - Petition for Writ of Prohibition - A Case of Original

Jurisdiction To Remove Marion County Circuit Court Judge Ann Melinda
Craggs
APPENDIX A - VERIFIED MOTION TO DISQUALIFY CIRCUIT

JUDGE ANN MELINDA CRAGGS
APPENDIX B - SECOND VERIFIED MOTION TO DISQUALIFY

CIRCUIT JUDGE ANN MELINDA CRAGGS.
APPENDIX C - DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO CANCEL HEARING SET

FOR NOVEMBER 28, 2016
APPENDIX D - DEFENDANTS’ SECOND MOTION TO CANCEL HEARING SET

FOR NOVEMBER 28, 2016
APPENDIX E - JUDICIAL DISQUALIFICATION - MEMORANDUM LAW
APPENDIX F - NOTICE OF REFILING FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS

COMPLAINT DUE TO Official Misconduct By David R. Ellspermann
Marion County Clerk of Court and Comptroller
APPENDIX G - INSTRUCTION TO THE CLERK ADMINISTRATIVE

ORDER A-2013-56, ESTABLISHING FORECLOSURE CASE STATUS
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS Filing # 54155368 E-Filed 03/23/2017
11:55:23 PM
On August 2, 2017 the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal entered the
following one-sentence order in Case No. 5D17-2317:
ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Prohibition, filed July 21,
2017, is denied on the merits.
12
The ruling does not meet the requirements of Florida law, or Constitutional
Due Process. Under Florida law, a judge has a duty to determine and decide
issues.

On August 25, 2017, the Florida Supreme Court in [SC17-1572] entered an

order on appeal that states,
This case is hereby dismissed. This Court lacks jurisdiction to review

an unelaborated decision from a district court of appeal that is issued
without opinion or explanation or that merely cites to an authority that
is not a case pending review in, or reversed or quashed by, this Court.
See Wells v. State, 132 So. 3d 1110 (Fla. 2014); Jackson v. State, 926
So. 2d 1262 (Fla. 2006); Gandy v. State, 846 So. 2d
1141 (Fla. 2003); Stallworth v. Moore, 827 So. 2d 974 (Fla. 2002);
Harrison v. Hyster Co., 515 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 1987); Dodi Publ’g Co.
v. Editorial Am. S.A., 385 So. 2d 1369 (Fla. 1980); Jenkins v. State,
385 So. 2d 1356 (Fla. 1980).
No motion for rehearing or reinstatement will be entertained by the
Court.
3
13
22. My SCOTUS petition in FLSC SC17-1570 has 6 questions presented:
1. Does the Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantee

the right to a trial by jury in a state court residential home foreclosure of a
federal Home Equity Conversion Mortgage [12 USC § 1715z–20; 24 CFR
Part 206] also called a HECM reverse mortgage?
2. Does a disabled homeowner age 61 have a right to assistance of counsel

under the federal Older Americans Act, 42 U.S. Code Chapter 35 -
PROGRAMS FOR OLDER AMERICANS, for old age, and disability
including Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and Traumatic Brain
Injury (TBI)?
3. Can the Civil Rights Division, Voting Section, U.S. Department of Justice
ignore the enclosed Voting Section complaint against Florida’s rigged
judicial elections?
4. Can the U.S. Department of Justice deny on May 18, 2017 my FOIA into
the mental health screening imposed by the Florida Supreme Court on bar
applicants, because the records you have requested pertain to an ongoing law
enforcement proceeding?
5. Can the U.S. Supreme Court ignore wrongdoing in Petition 12-7747 for a
writ of certiorari as stated in the enclosed letter of Mr. Clayton Higgins on
October 19, 2016?
6. Do time limits on civil litigation have any meaning? Pursuant to Fla. R.

Jud. Admin. 2.250(a)(1)(B), the time standard for a civil trial case is 18
months from filing to final disposition. Non-jury cases — 12 months (filing
to final disposition)
D. The Appellant Has To And Including Monday, February 12, 2018, To

File A Petition For Writ of Certiorari In A Related Case, FLSC SC17-1361.
23. I have to and including Monday, February 12, 2018, to file a petition for writ
of certiorari in a related case, Florida Supreme Court Case No. SC17-1361.
14
E. The Fifth District Court of Appeal Has Denied The Appellant Due
Process.
24. DUE PROCESS
Only a Florida licensed attorney in good standing is competent (Rule 4-1.1)
or diligent (Rule 4-1.3) to provide me legal advice and/or legal representation.
The 5thDCA Court found me indigent/insolvent. I am a non-lawyer, unable
to obtain adequate counsel, a consumer of legal and court services affecting
interstate commerce.
Legal protections found under the Constitution and laws of the U.S. and
Florida include,
• Due Process Clause; Equal Protection Clause, Fourteenth Amendment,
U.S. Constitution.
• Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45, for “due process in the constitutional
sense”
• Due Process, Article I, Section 9, Florida Constitution
• Access to Courts, Article I, Section 21, Florida Constitution
• Basic Rights, Article I, Section 2, Florida Constitution
• Fla. Stat. § 29.007 Court-appointed counsel “This section applies in any
situation in which the court appoints counsel to protect a litigant’s due
process rights.”
15
• Chapter 27 Florida Statutes, Part III, Other Court-Appointed Counsel.
Civil Regional Counsel where mandated constitutionally or by general
law in civil cases.
• The Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) and the ADA Amendments
Act (ADA 2008)
• The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended.
I am over age 60. The Older Americans Act (OAA) 42 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.,
as amended, provides for legal services under Title III B Services or Activities for
persons age 60 and over.
In Florida, the OAA is administered under Chapter 430, Florida Statutes, by
the Department of Elder Affairs, section 430.101, Administration of federal aging
programs.
The Department of Elder Affairs was established by Section 20.41, Florida
Statutes.
I am not competent, and not diligent, as defined by the Rules Regulating The
Florida Bar:
• Florida Bar Rule 4-1.1 Competence.
A lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent

representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and
preparation reasonably necessary for the representation.
16
• Florida Bar Rule 4-1.3 Diligence.
A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing
a client.
Powell vs. Alabama, civil counsel required for “due process in the
constitutional sense”.
MR. JUSTICE SUTHERLAND delivered the opinion of the Court...."If in

any case, civil or criminal, a state or federal court were arbitrarily to refuse
to hear a party by counsel, employed by and appearing for him, it reasonably
may not be doubted that such a refusal would be a denial of a hearing, and,
therefore, of due process in the constitutional sense..."
"...The right [p69] to be heard would be, in many cases, of little avail if it did
not comprehend the right to be heard by counsel. Even the intelligent and
educated layman has small and sometimes no skill in the science of law. If
charged with crime, he is incapable, generally, of determining for himself
whether the indictment is good or bad. He is unfamiliar with the rules of
evidence. Left without the aid of counsel, he may be put on trial without a
proper charge, and convicted upon incompetent evidence, or evidence
irrelevant to the issue or otherwise inadmissible. He lacks both the skill and
knowledge adequately to prepare his defense, even though he have a perfect
one. He requires the guiding hand of counsel at every step in the proceedings
against him. Without it, though he be not guilty, he faces the danger of
conviction because he does not know how to establish his innocence. If that
be true of men of intelligence, how much more true is it of the ignorant and
illiterate, or those of feeble intellect. If in any case, civil or criminal, a state
or federal court were arbitrarily to refuse to hear a party by counsel,
employed by and appearing for him, it reasonably may not be doubted that
such a refusal would be a denial of a hearing, and, therefore, of due process
in the constitutional sense..."
Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 Argued: October 10, 1932

Decided: November 7, 1932 224 Ala. 524, 531, 540, reversed.
17
The Supreme Court of Florida has a duty and the authority to
administratively provide civil legal counsel under the Fourteenth Amendment of
the U.S. Constitution for Due Process:
The Constitution states only one command twice. The Fifth Amendment
says to the federal government that no one shall be "deprived of life, liberty
or property without due process of law." The Fourteenth Amendment,
ratified in 1868, uses the same eleven words, called the Due Process Clause,
to describe a legal obligation of all states. These words have as their central
promise an assurance that all levels of American government must operate
within the law ("legality") and provide fair procedures....
Wex Due Process Article by Richard Strauss, Legal Information Institute

Cornell Law
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/due_process
. Constitutional requirement for due process under Florida law:
Article 1, section 9, Florida Constitution.
SECTION 9. Due process.—No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or

property without due process of law, or be twice put in jeopardy for the same
offense, or be compelled in any criminal matter to be a witness against
oneself.
. Case law for due process under Florida Law:
10A Fla. Jur 2d Constitutional Law § 480 (2007)
The guaranty of due process of law extends to every type of legal

proceeding. Pelle v. Diners Club, 287 So. 2d 737 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 3d
Dist. 1974); Tomayko v. Thomas, 143 So. 2d 227 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 3d
Dist. 1962). Whenever life, liberty, or property rights are involved in any
official action, the organic requirements of due process of law must be
afforded, whether such action is the exercise of the powers of government by
governmental departments, State ex rel. Barancik v. Gates, 134 So. 2d 497
(Fla. 1961); Williams v. Kelly, 133 Fla. 244, 182 So. 881 (1938) or a duly
18
authorized administrative or ministerial function or duty. State ex rel.

Barancik v. Gates. The constitutional guaranty of due process of law applies
not only to court and administrative procedures, but also to legislative acts.
Williams v. U.S., 179 F.2d 644 (5th Cir. 1950), cert. granted, 340 U.S. 849,
71 S. Ct. 77, 95 L. Ed. 622 (1950) and judgment aff'd, 341 U.S. 70, 71 S. Ct.
581, 95 L. Ed. 758 (1951) (implied overruling on other grounds recognized
by, U.S. v. McDermott, 918 F.2d 319 (2d Cir. 1990)) and (overruling on
other grounds recognized by, Brzonkala v. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University, 169 F.3d 820, 136 Ed. Law Rep. 15 (4th Cir. 1999)).
10A Fla. Jur 2d Constitutional Law § 483 (2007)
Due process encompasses both substantive and procedural due process.

McKinney v. Pate, 20 F.3d 1550 (11th Cir. 1994); M.W. v. Davis, 756 So.
2d 90, 25 Fla. L. Weekly S334 (Fla. 2000); State v. O.C., 748 So. 2d 945, 24
Fla. L. Weekly S425 (Fla. 1999).
Constitutional due process is required for Access to Courts, Article I,
Section 21, Florida Constitution, and Basic Rights, Article I, Section 2, Florida
Constitution.
SECTION 21. Access to courts.—The courts shall be open to every person

for redress of any injury, and justice shall be administered without sale,
denial or delay.
SECTION 2. Basic rights.—All natural persons, female and male alike, are
equal before the law and have inalienable rights, among which are the right
to enjoy and defend life and liberty, to pursue happiness, to be rewarded for
industry, and to acquire, possess and protect property; except that the
ownership, inheritance, disposition and possession of real property by aliens
ineligible for citizenship may be regulated or prohibited by law. No person
shall be deprived of any right because of race, religion, national origin, or
physical disability.
A litigant has a right to conflict-free counsel,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_counsel
19
Whether counsel is retained or appointed, the defendant has a right to counsel
without a conflict of interest *. If an actual conflict of interest is present, and that
conflict results in any adverse effect on the representation, the result is automatic
reversal.[17] The general rule is that conflicts can be knowingly and intelligently
waived,[18] but some conflicts are unwaivable. [19] *Wheat v. United States, 486
U.S. 153 (1988), conflicts of interest
[17] Burger v. Kemp, 483 U.S. 776 (1987); Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335
(1980); Holloway v. Arkansas, 435 U.S. 475 (1978).
[18] See United States v. Curcio, 680 F.2d 881 (2d Cir. 1982).
[19] See, e.g., United States v. Schwarz, 283 F.3d 76 (2d Cir. 2002); United
States v. Fulton, 5 F.3d 605 (2d Cir. 1993).
25. The state and federal judiciary denied me due process on a residential home
foreclosure of a federal Home Equity Conversion Mortgage [12 USC § 1715z–20;
24 CFR Part 206] also called a HECM reverse mortgage.
26. I was denied due process during a non-jury trial held July 18, 2017, see the
Affidavit of Neil J. Gillespie Non-Jury Trial July 18, 2017.
27. I am a disabled homeowner age 61 denied assistance of counsel under the
Older Americans Act, 42 U.S. Code Chapter 35 - PROGRAMS FOR OLDER
AMERICANS, for old age, and disability including Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
(PTSD), and Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)
28. The Civil Rights Division, Voting Section, U.S. Department of Justice
ignored my Voting Section complaint against Florida’s rigged judicial elections
20
29. The Florida Supreme Court failed to properly screen the mental health of bar
applicants.
WHEREFORE, I respectfully move to vacate this Court’s Order entered
November 21, 2017.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED December 8, 2017
NEIL J. GILLESPIE,
INDIVIDUALLY AND AS
FORMER TRUSTEE OF
THE TERMINATED
GILLESPIE FAMILY LIVING
TRUST AGREEMENT
21
Appeal 5D17-2665, Fifth District Court of Appeal Service List December 8, 2017
Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. v. Neil J. Gillespie, et al.
Marion County Circuit Court Case No. 2013-CA-000115
I hereby certify the names below were served by email today December 8, 2017.
Neil J. Gillespie
Judge Jay P. Cohen, Chief Judge, Fifth District Court of Appeal, Email: woodardj@flcourts.org
Joanne P. Simmons, Clerk, Fifth District Court of Appeal, Email: simmonsj@flcourts.org
David R. Ellspermann, Marion Co. Clerk of Court & Comptroller, Ellspermann@marioncountyclerk.org
Gregory C. Harrell, General Counsel to Clerk Ellspermann, GHarrell@marioncountyclerk.org


Telephone: (800)-774-1560; Fax: (407)386-3419

FIFTH DISTRICT
NEIL J. GILLESPIE, INDIVIDUALLY, AND

AS FORMER TRUSTEE OF THE
FEBRUARY 10, 1997,
Appellant,
v. CASE NO. 5D17-2665
REVERSE MORTGAGE
SOLUTIONS, INC.,
Appellee.
________________________/
DATE: November 21, 2017
ORDERED that Appellant’s November 6, 2017, Response is treated as a
motion to correct the record and is denied. Appellant has up to and including December
8, 2017, to serve the Initial Brief.

cc:
1
Page 1 of 3
Neil Gillespie
From: "Neil Gillespie" <neilgillespie@mfi.net>

To: "Greg Harrell" <gharrell@marioncountyclerk.org>; <woodardj@flcourts.org>; "Joanne P. Simmons"
<simmonsj@flcourts.org>; <MRService@mrpllc.com>; <MRService@mccalla.com>; "David
Ellspermann" <Ellspermann@marioncountyclerk.org>; <USAFLM.HUD@usdoj.gov>; "Michalene
Rowells" <Michalene.Y.Rowells@hud.gov>; <justin@infurnalaw.com>; <justininfurna@gmail.com>;
<colson@deccahomes.com>; <orhaboard@yahoo.com>; <neilgillespie@mfi.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 11:11 AM
Attach: 2017, 11-13-17, EMAIL PRR response from Greg Harrell.pdf; Service List November 14, 2017.pdf;
PRR to Clerk re Case # 17DC000193AX appearing on Record on Appeal in 5D17-2665.pdf; RULE
9.200. THE RECORD.pdf; Updated-E-Access-Standards-November-2016-v17-clean.pdf
Subject: RE: Record on Appeal 5D17-2665
Gregory C. Harrell
General Counsel to David R. Ellspermann, Marion County Clerk of Court & Comptroller
P.O. Box 1030
Ocala, Florida 34478-1030
(352) 671-5603
gharrell@marioncountyclerk.org
RE: Record on Appeal 5D17-2665
Mr. Harrell:
Thank you for your response to my PRR, see below and attached. Did the Clerk of the 5thDCA
serve Clerk Ellspermann APPELLANT'S RESPONSE TO SHOW CAUSE ORDER OF OCT-27-
2017?
You wrote in part, "Also, the Clerk is not required to mail a copy of the Record on Appeal to
anyone. Rule 9.110(e) of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure only requires the Clerk to
electronically transmit the record to the appellate court and serve copies of the Index to the Record
on Appeal on all parties."
For some reason the Clerk mailed a copy of the Record on Appeal to the Oak Run Homeowners
Association, Inc., to a wrong address, the address of my former attorney Robert Stermer, who is
now an adverse party. The Clerk did not mail, or "electronically transmit the record to the appellate
court and serve copies of the Index to the Record on Appeal on all parties." Mark Gillespie was not
served, either personally or through counsel Mr. Infurna. Elizabeth Bauerle nka Elizabeth Bidgood
(who the Clerk wrongly designated as Elizabeth Bidwood) was not served, either personally or
through counsel Mr. Infurna. Also of note, the Index to the Record on Appeal does not show any
trust parties, no unknown parties, and no spouse parties, and no service to trust parties, unknown
parties, or spouse parties. If those are not legitimate parties, the Clerk must state so on the record.
In my response to show cause in 5D17-2665, I inadvertently used an outdated version of the

Florida Supreme Court Standards for Electronic Access to the Courts (Version 14, May 2014). I
believe the current version is Version 17, November 2016, and doubles the size of a permitted
filing from 25 MB to 50 MB. I still believe the file with 3,467 pages exceeds 50 MB. In any event,
the file does not download. Until I can download the file, I cannot ensure that the record is prepared
and transmitted in accordance with Rule 9.200. (Rule 9.200(e)). Until I can download the file I
cannot know what provisions of Rule 9.200 must be enforced by motion to correct or supplement
2
12/7/2017
Page 2 of 3
the Record on Appeal (Rule 9.200(e) and (f)).
The Record on Appeal states, "Attorney For Appellant: NEIL J. GILLESPIE 8092 S.W. 115TH
LOOP OCALA FL 34471". You know I am not an "attorney". I am an indigent non-lawyer, age 61,
unable to obtain adequate counsel, a consumer of legal and court services affecting interstate
commerce, a consumer of personal, family and household goods and services, consumer
transactions in interstate commerce, a person with disabilities, a vulnerable adult, and reluctantly
appearing pro se. Also, the Clerk put the wrong zip code for me; the correct zip is 34481.
Also, the Index to the Record on Appeal shows the Clerk’s failure to properly designate a
description to court records, see the 5th page, that contains 25 or so court records simply called
"Exhibit" with no further designation. This bad practice is rampant throughout the docket. I believe
the Clerk’s docket must be corrected in accordance with 28.13 Papers and electronic filings. "The
clerk of the circuit court must maintain all papers and electronic filings in the clerk’s office with the
utmost care..." and 28.22205 Electronic filing process... "...statewide standards for electronic filing
to be used by the clerks of court to implement electronic filing. The standards should specify the
required information for the duties of the clerks of court and the judiciary for case management."
before the Index and the Record on Appeal can be filed.
Therefore I must file an amended Response to Show Cause Order of Oct-27-2017. I am advising
the Clerk and Chief Judge of the 5thDCA thereof by this email. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Neil J. Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Tel. 352-854-7807
----- Original Message -----

From: Greg Harrell
To: neilgillespie@mfi.net
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2017 4:55 PM
Subject: Re: PRR to Clerk re Case # 17DC000193AX appearing on Record on Appeal in 5D17-2665
Mr. Gillespie:
The Clerk's Office is not in possession of any documents responsive to your public records request dated November
10, 2017.
The "Case Number: 17DC000193AX" information found on the Index to the Record on Appeal and the Certificate of
Clerk in your appeal does not pertain to another proceeding; it is the Clerk's Appeals Department's in-house working
file number assigned and applied to those documents by Clericus's automated record on appeal preparation package.
Also, the Clerk is not required to mail a copy of the Record on Appeal to anyone. Rule 9.110(e) of the Florida Rules
of Appellate Procedure only requires the Clerk to electronically transmit the record to the appellate court and serve
copies of the Index to the Record on Appeal on all parties.
Finally, Rule 9.220 applies to an Appendix, not a full Record on Appeal, which is governed by Rule 9.200. An
Appendix and a full Record on Appeal are two different things.
12/7/2017
Page 3 of 3
Gregory C. Harrell
P.O. Box 1030
(352) 671-5603
>>> "Neil Gillespie" <neilgillespie@mfi.net> 11/10/2017 11:15 AM >>>

>
12/7/2017
Page 1 of 1
Neil Gillespie
From: "Greg Harrell" <gharrell@marioncountyclerk.org>

To: <neilgillespie@mfi.net>
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2017 4:55 PM
Subject: Re: PRR to Clerk re Case # 17DC000193AX appearing on Record on Appeal in 5D17-2665
Mr. Gillespie:
The Clerk's Office is not in possession of any documents responsive to your public records request dated November 10,
2017.
The "Case Number: 17DC000193AX" information found on the Index to the Record on Appeal and the Certificate of
Clerk in your appeal does not pertain to another proceeding; it is the Clerk's Appeals Department's in-house working
file number assigned and applied to those documents by Clericus's automated record on appeal preparation package.
Also, the Clerk is not required to mail a copy of the Record on Appeal to anyone. Rule 9.110(e) of the Florida Rules of
Appellate Procedure only requires the Clerk to electronically transmit the record to the appellate court and serve copies
of the Index to the Record on Appeal on all parties.
Finally, Rule 9.220 applies to an Appendix, not a full Record on Appeal, which is governed by Rule 9.200. An
Appendix and a full Record on Appeal are two different things.
Gregory C. Harrell
P.O. Box 1030
(352) 671-5603
>>> "Neil Gillespie" <neilgillespie@mfi.net> 11/10/2017 11:15 AM >>>

>
11/14/2017
Appeal 5D17-2665, Fifth District Court of Appeal Service List November 14, 2017
Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. v. Neil J. Gillespie, et al.
Marion County Circuit Court Case No. 2013-CA-000115
I hereby certify the names below were served by email today November 14, 2017.
Neil J. Gillespie
Judge Jay P. Cohen, Chief Judge, Fifth District Court of Appeal, Email: woodardj@flcourts.org
Joanne P. Simmons, Clerk, Fifth District Court of Appeal, Email: simmonsj@flcourts.org
David R. Ellspermann, Marion Co. Clerk of Court & Comptroller, Ellspermann@marioncountyclerk.org
Gregory C. Harrell, General Counsel to Clerk Ellspermann, GHarrell@marioncountyclerk.org


Telephone: (800)-774-1560; Fax: (407)386-3419

VIA Email: Ellspermann@marioncountyclerk.org November 10, 2017
David R. Ellspermann
Marion County Clerk of Court & Comptroller
Marion County Courthouse
110 NW 1st Ave., Ocala, FL 34475
Cc: Greg Harrell, General Counsel
Email: GHarrell@marioncountyclerk.org
RE: Case Number 17DC000193AX appearing on Record on Appeal 5D17-2665

Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. v. Neil J. Gillespie et al. Marion County
Case No. 2013-CA-115, FL Fifth Judicial Circuit; 42-2013CA000115-CAAXXX
RE: Public Records Request (PRR), Art. I, Sec. 24, Fla. Const. All public records requests
shall be acknowledged promptly and in good faith, F.S. § 119.07(1)(c)
Dear Mr. Ellspermann:
This is a PRR for records in Case No. 17DC000193AX that appears on the Record on Appeal
you mailed me in DCA# 5D17-2665. Provide the complaint in No. Case 17DC000193AX
Provide records showing who was mailed the Record on Appeal in DCA# 5D17-2665.
FYI, Fla. R. App. P. 9.220(c) requires in part, “The appendix shall be properly indexed and
consecutively paginated, beginning with the cover sheet as page 1.” The appendix you mailed
me is not consecutively paginated, beginning with the cover sheet as page 1.
Page 1 of the Record on Appeal you mailed me in DCA# 5D17-2665 showing

Case No. 17DC000193AX accompanies this PRR for identification.
Sincerely,
Neil J. Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Tel. 352-854-7807
Attachment
Page 1 of 1
Neil Gillespie
From: "Neil Gillespie" <neilgillespie@mfi.net>

To: "David Ellspermann" <Ellspermann@marioncountyclerk.org>
Cc: "Greg Harrell" <GHarrell@marioncountyclerk.org>; "Neil Gillespie" <neilgillespie@mfi.net>; "Mark
Gillespie" <mark.gillespie@att.net>; <justin@infurnalaw.com>; <justininfurna@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2017 11:15 AM
Attach: PRR to Clerk re Case # 17DC000193AX appearing on Record on Appeal in 5D17-2665.pdf
Subject: PRR to Clerk re Case # 17DC000193AX appearing on Record on Appeal in 5D17-2665
11/14/2017
•
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT
NE~ J GILLESPIE, INDIVIDUALLY, Case Number: 17DC000193AX

AND AS FORMER TRUSTEE OF THE DCA #: SD17-266S
TER1\1INATED GILLESPIE FAMILY Appealed Cases: 13CAOOO lIS AX
LIVING TRUST AGREE1\1ENT DATED
FEBRUARY 10, 1997
Appellant,
-vs.
REVERSE MORTGAGE SOLUTIONS INC

Appellee.
RECORD ON
APPEAL
Attorney For Appellant: Attorney For Appellee:
NEIL J. GILLESPIE MCCALLA RAYMER LEIBERT PIERCE, LLC

8092 S.W. 11S TH LOOP 225 E. ROBINSON ST., STE 155
OCALA FL 34471 ORLANDO, FL 32801
COLLEEN MURPHY DAVIS, ASSISTANT

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY (IRS)
400 NORTH TAMPA STREET, STE 3200
TAMPA, FL 33602
OAK RUN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.

7480 S.W. HIGHWAY 200
OCALA, FL 34476
certificate of compliance with the font standards set forth in this rule for computer-generated
briefs.
RULE 9.220. APPENDIX
(a) Purpose. The purpose of an appendix is to permit the parties to

prepare and transmit copies of those portions of the record deemed necessary to an
understanding of the issues presented. It may be served with any petition, brief,
motion, response, or reply but shall be served as otherwise required by these rules.
In any proceeding in which an appendix is required, if the court finds that the
appendix is incomplete, it shall direct a party to supply the omitted parts of the
appendix. No proceeding shall be determined until an opportunity to supplement
the appendix has been given.
(b) Contents. The appendix shall contain a coversheet, an index, a

certificate of service, and a conformed copy of the opinion or order to be reviewed
and may contain any other portions of the record and other authorities. Asterisks
should be used to indicate omissions in documents or testimony of witnesses. The
cover sheet shall state the name of the court, the style of the cause, including the
case number if assigned, the party on whose behalf the appendix is filed, the
petition, brief, motion, response, or reply for which the appendix is served, and the
name and address of the attorney, or pro se party, filing the appendix.
(c) Electronic Format. The appendix shall be prepared and filed

electronically as a separate Portable Document Format (“PDF”) file. The
electronically filed appendix shall be filed as 1 document, unless size limitations or
technical requirements established by the Florida Supreme Court Standards for
Electronic Access to the Courts require multiple parts. The appendix shall be
properly indexed and consecutively paginated, beginning with the cover sheet as
page 1. The PDF file(s) shall:
(1) be text searchable;
(2) be paginated so that the page numbers displayed by the PDF

reader exactly match the pagination of the index;
October 1, 2017 Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 131

The Florida Bar
(3) be bookmarked, consistently with the index, such that each
bookmark states the date, name of the document which it references, and directs to
the first page of that document. All bookmarks must be viewable in a separate
window; and
(4) not contain condensed transcripts, unless authorized by the

court.
(d) Paper Format. When a paper appendix is authorized, it shall be

separated from the petition, brief, motion, response, or reply that it accompanies.
The appendix shall be consecutively paginated, beginning with the cover sheet as
page 1. In addition, the following requirements shall apply:
(1) if the appendix includes documents filed before January 1991

on paper measuring 8 1/2 by 14 inches, the documents should be reduced in
copying to 8 1/2 by 11 inches, if practicable; and
(2) if reduction is impracticable, the appendix may measure 8 1/2

by 14 inches, but must be separated from the 8 1/2 by 11-inch document(s) that it
accompanies.
Committee Notes
1977 Adoption. This rule is new and has been adopted to encourage the use of an
appendix either as a separate document or as a part of another matter. An appendix is optional,
except under rules 9.100, 9.110(i), 9.120, and 9.130. If a legal size (8 1/2 by 14 inches) appendix
is used, counsel should make it a separate document. The term “conformed copy” is used
throughout these rules to mean a true and accurate copy. In an appendix the formal parts of a
document may be omitted if not relevant.
1980 Amendment. The rule has been amended to reflect the requirement that an
appendix accompany a suggestion filed under rule 9.125.
1992 Amendment. This amendment addresses the transitional problem that arises if legal
documents filed before January 1991 must be included in an appendix filed after that date. It
encourages the reduction of 8 ½ by 14 inch papers to 8 ½ by 11 inches if practicable, and
requires such documents to be bound separately if reduction is impracticable.

The Florida Bar
agency’s finding is subject to judicial review, however, on application for a stay under
subdivision (e)(2)(B).
Absent an emergency suspension order, the court grants a stay as of right in

Administrative Procedure Act license suspension and revocation cases unless the licensing
agency makes a timely showing that a stay “would constitute a probable danger to the health,
safety, or welfare of the state.” § 120.68(3), Fla. Stat. (1999). The court can shorten the 10 day
period specified in subdivision (e)(2)(c). If the court stays a nonemergency suspension or
revocation, the licensing agency can move to modify or dissolve the stay on the basis of material
information that comes to light after the stay is issued.
Nothing in subdivision (e) precludes licensing agencies from making suspension or

revocation orders effective 30 days after entry, granting stays pending judicial review, or taking
other steps to implement section 120.68(3), Florida Statutes.
2004 Amendment. Subdivision (e)(2)(C) was amended to clarify that the ten days (or
shorter period set by the court) within which the agency has to respond runs from the filing of the
motion for stay. See Ludwig v. Dept. of Health, 778 So. 2d 531 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).
2011 Amendment. Subdivisions (b)(1) and (b)(2) were amended to clarify the
procedures for seeking judicial review of immediate final orders and emergency orders
suspending, restricting, or limiting a license. Subdivision (c)(2)(F) was added and subdivision
(c)(2) was amended to clarify the record for purposes of judicial review of immediate final
orders.
RULE 9.200. THE RECORD
(a) Contents.
(1) Except as otherwise designated by the parties, the record shall

consist of all documents filed in the lower tribunal, all exhibits that are not physical
evidence, and any transcript(s) of proceedings filed in the lower tribunal, except
summonses, praecipes, subpoenas, returns, notices of hearing or of taking
deposition, depositions, and other discovery. In criminal cases, when any exhibit,
including physical evidence, is to be included in the record, the clerk of the lower
tribunal shall not, unless ordered by the court, transmit the original and, if capable
of reproduction, shall transmit a copy, including but not limited to copies of any
tapes, CDs, DVDs, or similar electronically recorded evidence. The record shall
also include a progress docket.

The Florida Bar
(2) Within 10 days of filing the notice of appeal, an appellant may
direct the clerk to include or exclude other documents or exhibits filed in the lower
tribunal. The directions shall be substantially in the form prescribed by rule
9.900(g). If the clerk is directed to transmit less than the entire record or a
transcript of trial with less than all of the testimony, the appellant shall serve with
such direction a statement of the judicial acts to be reviewed. Within 20 days of
filing the notice, an appellee may direct the clerk to include additional documents
and exhibits.
(3) The parties may prepare a stipulated statement showing how the
issues to be presented arose and were decided in the lower tribunal, attaching a
copy of the order to be reviewed and as much of the record in the lower tribunal as
is necessary to a determination of the issues to be presented. The parties shall
advise the clerk of the lower tribunal of their intention to rely on a stipulated
statement in lieu of the record as early in advance of filing as possible. The
stipulated statement shall be filed by the parties and transmitted to the court by the
clerk of the lower tribunal within the time prescribed for transmittal of the record.
(b) Transcript(s) of Proceedings.
(1) Within 10 days of filing the notice, the appellant shall designate
those portions of the proceedings not on file deemed necessary for transcription
and inclusion in the record. Within 20 days of filing the notice, an appellee may
designate additional portions of the proceedings. Copies of designations shall be
served on the approved court reporter, civil court reporter, or approved
transcriptionist. Costs of the transcript(s) so designated shall be borne initially by
the designating party, subject to appropriate taxation of costs as prescribed by rule
9.400. At the time of the designation, unless other satisfactory arrangements have
been made, the designating party must make a deposit of 1/2 of the estimated
transcript costs, and must pay the full balance of the fee on delivery of the
completed transcript(s).
(2) Within 30 days of service of a designation, or within the

additional time provided for under subdivision (b)(3) of this rule, the approved
court reporter, civil court reporter, or approved transcriptionist shall transcribe and
file with the clerk of the lower tribunal the designated proceedings and shall serve
The Florida Bar
copies as requested in the designation. If a designating party directs the approved
court reporter, civil court reporter, or approved transcriptionist to furnish the
transcript(s) to fewer than all parties, that designating party shall serve a copy of
the designated transcript(s) on the parties within 5 days of receipt from the
approved court reporter, civil court reporter, or approved transcriptionist. The
transcript of the trial shall be filed with the clerk separately from the transcript(s)
of any other designated proceedings. The transcript of the trial shall be followed by
a master trial index containing the names of the witnesses, a list of all exhibits
offered and introduced in evidence, and the pages where each may be found. The
pages, including the index pages, shall be consecutively numbered, beginning with
page 1. The pages shall not be condensed.
(3) On service of a designation, the approved court reporter, civil

court reporter, or approved transcriptionist shall acknowledge at the foot of the
designation the fact that it has been received and the date on which the approved
court reporter, civil court reporter, or approved transcriptionist expects to have the
transcript(s) completed and shall serve the so-endorsed designation on the parties
and file it with the clerk of the court within 5 days of service. If the transcript(s)
cannot be completed within 30 days of service of the designation, the approved
court reporter, civil court reporter, or approved transcriptionist shall request such
additional time as is reasonably necessary and shall state the reasons therefor. If
the approved court reporter, civil court reporter, or approved transcriptionist
requests an extension of time, the court shall allow the parties 5 days in which to
object or agree. The court shall approve the request or take other appropriate action
and shall notify the reporter and the parties of the due date of the transcript(s).
(4) If no report of the proceedings was made, or if the transcript is

unavailable, a party may prepare a statement of the evidence or proceedings from
the best available means, including the party’s recollection. The statement shall be
served on all other parties, who may serve objections or proposed amendments to it
within 10 days of service. Thereafter, the statement and any objections or proposed
amendments shall be filed with the lower tribunal for settlement and approval. As
settled and approved, the statement shall be included by the clerk of the lower
tribunal in the record.

The Florida Bar
(c) Cross-Appeals. Within 20 days of filing the notice, a cross-appellant
may direct that additional documents, exhibits, or transcript(s) be included in the
record. If less than the entire record is designated, the cross-appellant shall serve,
with the directions, a statement of the judicial acts to be reviewed. The cross-
appellee shall have 10 days after such service to direct further additions. The time
for preparation and transmittal of the record shall be extended by 10 days.
(d) Preparation and Transmission of Electronic Record.
(1) The clerk of the lower tribunal shall prepare the record as
follows:
(A) The clerk of the lower tribunal shall assemble the record
on appeal and prepare a cover page and a complete index to the record. The cover
page shall include the name of the lower tribunal, the style and number of the case,
and the caption RECORD ON APPEAL in 48-point bold font. Consistent with
Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.420(g)(8), the index shall indicate any
confidential information in the record and if the information was determined to be
confidential in an order, identify such order by date or docket number and record
page number. The clerk of the lower tribunal shall not be required to verify and
shall not charge for the incorporation of any transcript(s) into the record. The
transcript of the trial shall be kept separate from the remainder of the record on
appeal and shall not be renumbered by the clerk. The progress docket shall be
incorporated into the record immediately after the index.
(B) All pages of the remainder of the record shall be

consecutively numbered. Any transcripts other than the transcript of the trial shall
continue the pagination of the record pages. Supplements permitted after the clerk
of the lower tribunal has transmitted the record to the court shall be submitted by
the clerk as separate Portable Document Format (“PDF”) files in which pagination
is consecutive from the original record and continues through each supplement.
(C) The entire record, except for the transcript of the trial,
shall be compiled into a single PDF file. The PDF file shall include all filings in
their redacted form. The unredacted version of any information in the record shall
be provided to the appellate court upon request. The PDF file shall be:
The Florida Bar
(i) text searchable;
(ii) paginated so that the page numbers displayed by

the PDF reader exactly match the pagination of the index; and
(iii) bookmarked, consistently with the index, such that

each bookmark states the date, name, and record page of the filing and the
bookmarks are viewable in a separate window.
(2) The transcript of the trial shall be converted into a second PDF
file. The PDF file shall be:
(A) text searchable; and
(B) paginated to exactly match the pagination of the master

trial index of the transcript of the trial filed under subdivision (b)(2).
(3) The clerk of the lower tribunal shall certify the record and
transmit the record and the transcript of the trial to the court by uploading the PDF
files:
(A) via the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal; or
(B) in accordance with the procedure established by the

appellate court’s administrative order governing transmission of the record.
(4) The court shall upload the electronic record to the electronic
filing (e-filing) system docket. Attorneys and those parties who are registered users
of the court’s e-filing system may download the electronic record in their case(s).
(e) Duties of Appellant or Petitioner. The burden to ensure that the

record is prepared and transmitted in accordance with these rules shall be on the
petitioner or appellant. Any party may enforce the provisions of this rule by
motion.
(f) Correcting and Supplementing Record.

The Florida Bar
(1) If there is an error or omission in the record, the parties by
stipulation, the lower tribunal before the record is transmitted, or the court may
correct the record.
(2) If the court finds the record is incomplete, it shall direct a party
to supply the omitted parts of the record. No proceeding shall be determined,
because of an incomplete record, until an opportunity to supplement the record has
been given.
(3) If the court finds that the record is not in compliance with the
requirements of subdivision (d) of this rule, it may direct the clerk of the lower
tribunal to submit a compliant record, which will replace the previously filed
noncompliant record.
Committee Notes
1977 Amendment. This rule replaces former rule 3.6 and represents a complete revision
of the matters pertaining to the record for an appellate proceeding. References in this rule to
“appellant” and “appellee” should be treated as equivalent to “petitioner” and “respondent,”
respectively. See Commentary, Fla. R. App. P. 9.020. This rule is based in part on Federal Rule
of Appellate Procedure 10(b).
Subdivision (a)(1) establishes the content of the record unless an appellant within 10 days
of filing the notice directs the clerk to exclude portions of the record or to include additional
portions, or the appellee within 20 days of the notice being filed directs inclusion of additional
portions. In lieu of a record, the parties may prepare a stipulated statement, attaching a copy of
the order that is sought to be reviewed and essential portions of the record. If a stipulated
statement is prepared, the parties must advise the clerk not to prepare the record. The stipulated
statement is to be filed and transmitted within the time prescribed for transmittal of the record. If
less than a full record is to be used, the initiating party must serve a statement of the judicial acts
to be reviewed so that the opposing party may determine whether additional portions of the
record are required. Such a statement is not intended to be the equivalent of assignments of error
under former rule 3.5. Any inadequacy in the statement may be cured by motion to supplement
the record under subdivision (f) of this rule.
Subdivision (a) interacts with subdivision (b) so that as soon as the notice is filed the
clerk of the lower tribunal will prepare and transmit the complete record of the case as described
by the rule. To include in the record any of the items automatically omitted, a party must
designate the items desired. A transcript of the proceedings in the lower tribunal will not be
prepared or transmitted unless already filed, or the parties designate the portions of the transcript
The Florida Bar
desired to be transmitted. Subdivision (b)(2) imposes on the reporter an affirmative duty to
prepare the transcript of the proceedings as soon as designated. It is intended that to complete the
preparation of all official papers to be filed with the court, the appellant need only file the notice,
designate omitted portions of the record that are desired, and designate the desired portions of the
transcript. It therefore will be unnecessary to file directions with the clerk of the lower tribunal in
most cases.
Subdivision (b)(1) replaces former rule 3.6(d)(2), and specifically requires service of the
designation on the court reporter. This is intended to avoid delays that sometimes occur when a
party files the designation, but fails to notify the court reporter that a transcript is needed. The
rule also establishes the responsibility of the designating party to initially bear the cost of the
transcript.
Subdivision (b)(2) replaces former rule 3.6(e). This rule provides for the form of the
transcript, and imposes on the reporter the affirmative duty of delivering copies of the transcript
to the ordering parties on request. Such a request may be included in the designation. Under
subdivision (e), however, the responsibility for ensuring performance remains with the parties.
The requirement that pages be consecutively numbered is new and is deemed necessary to assure
continuity and ease of reference for the convenience of the court. This requirement applies even
if 2 or more parties designate portions of the proceedings for transcription. It is intended that the
transcript portions transmitted to the court constitute a single consecutively numbered document
in 1 or more volumes not exceeding 200 pages each. If there is more than 1 court reporter, the
clerk will renumber the pages of the transcript copies so that they are sequential. The
requirement of a complete index at the beginning of each volume is new, and is necessary to
standardize the format and to guide those preparing transcripts.
Subdivision (b)(3) provides the procedures to be followed if no transcript is available.
Subdivision (c) provides the procedures to be followed if there is a cross-appeal or cross-

petition.
Subdivision (d) sets forth the manner in which the clerk of the lower tribunal is to prepare
the record. The original record is to be transmitted unless the parties stipulate or the lower court
orders the original be retained, except that under rule 9.140(d) (governing criminal cases), the
original is to be retained unless the court orders otherwise.
Subdivision (e) places the burden of enforcement of this rule on the appellant or
petitioner, but any party may move for an order requiring adherence to the rule.
Subdivision (f) replaces former rule 3.6(l). The new rule is intended to ensure that
appellate proceedings will be decided on their merits and that no showing of good cause,
negligence, or accident is required before the lower tribunal or the court orders the completion of

The Florida Bar
the record. This rule is intended to ensure that any portion of the record in the lower tribunal that
is material to a decision by the court will be available to the court. It is specifically intended to
avoid those situations that have occurred in the past when an order has been affirmed because
appellate counsel failed to bring up the portions of the record necessary to determine whether
there was an error. See Pan American Metal Prods. Co. v. Healy, 138 So. 2d 96 (Fla. 3d DCA
1962). The rule is not intended to cure inadequacies in the record that result from the failure of a
party to make a proper record during the proceedings in the lower tribunal. The purpose of the
rule is to give the parties an opportunity to have the appellate proceedings decided on the record
developed in the lower tribunal. This rule does not impose on the lower tribunal or the court a
duty to review on their own the adequacy of the preparation of the record. A failure to
supplement the record after notice by the court may be held against the party at fault.
Subdivision (g) requires that the record in civil cases be returned to the lower tribunal
after final disposition by the court regardless of whether the original record or a copy was used.
The court may retain or return the record in criminal cases according to its internal
administration policies.
1980 Amendment. Subdivisions (b)(1) and (b)(2) were amended to specify that the party
designating portions of the transcript for inclusion in the record on appeal shall pay for the cost
of transcription and shall pay for and furnish a copy of the portions designated for all opposing
parties. See rule 9.420(b) and 1980 committee note thereto relating to limitations of number of
copies.
1987 Amendment. Subdivision (b)(3) above is patterned after Federal Rule of Appellate
Procedure 11(b).
1992 Amendment. Subdivisions (b)(2), (d)(1)(A), and (d)(1)(B) were amended to

standardize the lower court clerk’s procedure with respect to the placement and pagination of the
transcript in the record on appeal. This amendment places the duty of paginating the transcript on
the court reporter and requires the clerk to include the transcript at the end of the record, without
repagination.
1996 Amendment. Subdivision (a)(2) was added because family law cases frequently
have continuing activity at the lower tribunal level during the pendency of appellate proceedings
and that continued activity may be hampered by the absence of orders being enforced during the
pendency of the appeal.
Subdivision (b)(2) was amended to change the wording in the third sentence from
“transcript of proceedings” to “transcript of the trial” to be consistent with and to clarify the
requirement in subdivision (d)(1)(B) that it is only the transcript of trial that is not to be
renumbered by the clerk. Pursuant to subdivision (d)(1)(B), it remains the duty of the clerk to
consecutively number transcripts other than the transcript of the trial. Subdivision (b)(2) retains
The Florida Bar
the requirement that the court reporter is to number each page of the transcript of the trial
consecutively, but it is the committee’s view that if the consecutive pagination requirement is
impracticable or becomes a hardship for the court reporting entity, relief may be sought from the
court.
2006 Amendment. Subdivision (a)(2) is amended to apply to juvenile dependency and

termination of parental rights cases and cases involving families and children in need of services.
The justification for retaining the original orders, reports, and recommendations of magistrate or
hearing officers, and judgments within the file of the lower tribunal in family law cases applies
with equal force in juvenile dependency and termination of parental rights cases, and cases
involving families and children in need of services.
2014 Amendment. The phrase “all exhibits that are not physical evidence” in
subdivision (a)(1) is intended to encompass all exhibits that are capable of reproduction,
including, but not limited to, documents, photographs, tapes, CDs, DVDs, and similar
reproducible material. Exhibits that are physical evidence include items that are not capable of
reproduction, such as weapons, clothes, biological material, or any physical item that cannot be
reproduced as a copy by the clerk’s office.
2015 Amendment. The amendments in In re Amendments to Rule of Appellate

Procedure 9.200, 164 So. 3d 668 (Fla. 2015), do not modify the clerk’s obligation to transmit a
separate copy of the index to the parties, pursuant to rule 9.110(e).
RULE 9.210. BRIEFS
(a) Generally. In addition to briefs on jurisdiction under rule 9.120(d),

the only briefs permitted to be filed by the parties in any one proceeding are the
initial brief, the answer brief, a reply brief, and a cross-reply brief. All briefs
required by these rules shall be prepared as follows:
(1) When not filed in electronic format, briefs shall be printed,

typewritten, or duplicated on opaque, white, unglossed paper. The dimensions of
each page of a brief, regardless of format, shall be 8 1/2 by 11 inches.
(2) The lettering in briefs shall be black and in distinct type,

double-spaced, with margins no less than 1 inch. Lettering in script or type made in
imitation of handwriting shall not be permitted. Footnotes and quotations may be
single spaced and shall be in the same size type, with the same spacing between
characters, as the text in the body of the brief. Headings and subheadings shall be

The Florida Bar
Florida Supreme Court
Standards for Electronic
Access to the Courts
Adopted June 2009
Adopted modifications November 2016
Version 17.0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0. PORTAL TECHNOLOGY STANDARDS ........................................................................................... 4
2.0 PORTAL FUNCTIONALITY .......................................................................................................................... 4
2.1. E-Portal Minimal Functionality ................................................................................................................ 4
3.0 ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION AND FILING OF DOCUMENTS ................................................... 4
3.1. E-Filing Standards .................................................................................................................................... 4
3.1.1. Size of Filing................................................................................................................................... 4
3.1.2. Document Format ........................................................................................................................... 4
3.1.3. Document Rendering ...................................................................................................................... 5
3.1.4. Archiving ........................................................................................................................................ 5
3.1.5. File Name Standards ....................................................................................................................... 5
3.1.6. Time Stamp ..................................................................................................................................... 6
3.1.7. Electronic Notification of Receipt .................................................................................................. 7
3.1.8. Review by Clerk of Court ............................................................................................................... 7
3.1.9. Security ........................................................................................................................................... 7
3.1.10. Filing Process and Payment ............................................................................................................ 7
3.1.11. Transmission Envelope ................................................................................................................... 7
3.1.12. Court Control of Court Documents - Data Storage ......................................................................... 8
3.1.13. Requirements for Individual Filers ................................................................................................. 8
3.1.14. Adding a Party ................................................................................................................................ 9
3.1.15. Docket Numbering .......................................................................................................................... 9
3.2. TECHNICAL FAILURE ............................................................................................................................... 9
3.2.1. Retransmission of Electronic Filing ................................................................................................. 9
3.2.2. System Availability and Recovery Planning.................................................................................... 9
3.3. ADA AND TECHNOLOGY COMPLIANCE ...............................................................................................11
3.4. ELECTRONIC PROCESSES - JUDICIAL ....................................................................................................11
3.4.1. Delivery of Electronic Case Files .................................................................................................... 11
3.5. ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES .........................................................................................................12
Version 17.0, November 2016 2 Standards for Electronic Access to the Courts
3.5.1. Signatures of Registered Users ........................................................................................................ 12
3.5.2. Multiple Attorneys of Record Signatures ........................................................................................ 12
3.5.3. Original Documents or Handwritten Signatures .............................................................................. 12
3.5.4. Judge Signature ................................................................................................................................ 12
3.5.4.1. Security ................................................................................................................................. 13
3.5.4.2. Functionality ......................................................................................................................... 13
3.5.5 Clerk Signature ................................................................................................................................ 13
3.6 ELECTRONIC NOTARIZATION ........................................................................................................................ 13
1.0. PORTAL TECHNOLOGY STANDARDS
The Florida Court’s E-Filing Portal (“Portal”) is governed by the Florida Courts E-Filing
Authority. The Portal provides a single statewide point of access for filing court records and
interfaces with other existing statewide information systems.
2.0 PORTAL FUNCTIONALITY
2.1. E-Portal Minimal Functionality
1. Single statewide login.

2. Process for non-attorneys and for self-represented users to access the system.
3. Uniform authentication method.
4. Single point of access for filing and service.
5. Consolidated electronic notification.
6. Process for local validation.
7. Automated interface with other e-filing systems.
8. Utilize the current XML ECF Standards.
9. Accommodate bi-directional transmissions to and from courts.
10. Integrate with other established statewide systems.
11. Accept electronic forms of payment.
12. All court based e-filing processes will use Internet-based open standards.
3.0 ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION AND FILING OF DOCUMENTS

With the establishment of the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal, the Florida Courts have a single
state-wide e-filing system. On June 21, 2012, the Supreme Court issued opinions approving
recommendations to require e-filing by attorneys and e-service, through a phased in
implementation.
3.1. E-Filing Standards
3.1.1. Size of Filing

A single submission, whether consisting of a single document or multiple documents,
shall not exceed 50 megabytes (50 MB) in size.
3.1.2. Document Format

All electronically filed documents should be legibly typewritten or printed on only one
side of letter sized (8 ½ by 12 inch) paper; should have one inch margins on all sides and
on all pages and pages should be numbered consecutively; should be filed in a format
capable of being electronically searched and printed; should be filed in black and white;
reduction of legal-size (8 ½ by 14 inches) documents to letter size (8 ½ by 12 inches) is
prohibited; documents that are to be recorded in the public records of any county shall
leave a 3-inch by 3-inch space at the top right-hand corner of the first page and a 1-inch
by 3-inch space at the top right-hand corner on each subsequent page blank and reserved
for use by the clerk of court; Optical Character Recognition (“OCR”) scanned documents
should be at a resolution of 300 DPI as defined in the State of Florida Electronic Records
and Records Management Practices; at all times possible, documents should be
electronically signed as defined in Section 2.8; multiple pleadings, motions, etc., should
not be combined into one single file, but rather each individual document should be
uploaded via the Portal document submission process and should comply with
accessibility requirements set forth in section 2.6. Deviation from these guidelines may
result in the submitted filing being moved to the Pending Queue by the Clerk with the
filer being notified via email and requested to correct the issue(s) with the document(s)
and resubmit the filing.
3.1.3. Document Rendering

The clerk shall be able to render document images in searchable PDF format for viewer
interfaces where the judicial viewer does not already provide searchable documents.
3.1.4. Archiving
Electronic documents shall be archived in a manner that allows for presenting the
information in the future without degradation, loss of content, or issues with software
compatibility relative to the proper rendering of electronic documents.
3.1.5. File Name Standards

The following special characters are not allowed in a file name:
 Quotation mark (")
 Number sign (#)
 Percent (%)
 Ampersand (&)
 Asterisk (*)
 Colon (:)
 Angle brackets (less than, greater than) (< >)
 Question mark (?)
 Backslash (\)
 Slash (/)
 Braces (left and right) ({ })
 Pipe (|)
 Tilde (~)
File names may not end with any of the following strings:
 .files
 _files
 -Dateien
 _fichiers
 _bestanden
 _file
 _archivos
 -filer
 _tiedostot
 _pliki
 _soubory
 _elemei
 _ficheiros
 _arquivos
 _dosyalar
 _datoteke
 _fitxers
 _failid
 _fails
 _bylos
 _fajlovi
 _fitxategiak
In addition, file names cannot exceed 110 bytes in length, including spaces. Spaces must
be counted as three (3) bytes each.
This required information will be submitted in a uniform e-filing envelope, in compliance

with current rules of procedure. The Florida Courts Technology Commission (FCTC)
has established, and shall update as necessary, the requirements for the e-filing envelopes
for each division and court type. The e-filing envelope will be maintained on the e-filing
system of each court. These requirements can be found at
http://www.flcourts.org/resources-and-services/court-technology/efiling/.
The e-filing envelope shall be designed to collect the data elements in .XML format that
support the filing, indexing, docketing, calendaring, accounting, reporting, document
development, case management and other necessary functions of the court. In an effort to
reduce redundant data entry, emphasis is placed on providing the ability to extract text
from the electronic submission.
3.1.6. Time Stamp

Date and time stamp formats must include a single line detailing the name of the court or
Portal and shall not include clerk seals. Date stamps must be 8 numerical digits separated
by slashes with 2 digits for the month, 2 digits for the date, and 4 digits for the year.
Time stamps must be formatted in 12 hour time frames with a.m. or p.m. included. The
font size and type must comply with The Americans with Disabilities Act requirements.
The Portal’s official file stamp date and time shall be affixed in the upper left hand
corner. The Florida Supreme Court and District Courts of Appeal stamps shall be on the
left margin readable horizontally. Any administrative agency stamp shall be in the right
margin and readable horizontally. The clerk’s stamp for circuit and county courts shall be
in the bottom of the document.
3.1.7. Electronic Notification of Receipt
All submissions must generate an acknowledgment message that is transmitted to the filer
to indicate that the portal has received the document.
At a minimum the acknowledgment must include the date and time the submission was
received which is the official filing date/time.
3.1.8. Review by Clerk of Court

When information has been submitted electronically to the Clerk of Court’s Office, via
the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal, the Clerk of Court will review the filed document and
determine whether it contains the required information for placement into the clerk’s case
maintenance system. If, during the local document receiving process a determination is
made that the filed document conflicts with any court rules or standards, then the clerk
shall place the filed document into a pending queue. A filing may be placed in a pending
queue for any reason that prevents the filing from being accepted into the clerk’s case
maintenance system, e.g. documents that cannot be associated with a pending case; a
corrupt file1; or an incorrect filing fee.
Once placed in a pending queue, the clerk shall attempt to contact the filer and correct the
identified issue(s). The filing will remain in a pending queue for no more than 5 (five)
business days, after which time the filing will be docketed, as filed, and processed for
judicial review.
3.1.9. Security
The Portal shall provide initial screening and protection against unauthorized network
intrusions, viruses, and attacks for all filings. The Portal shall be isolated from other
court networks or applications. Software and security devices such as antivirus software,
firewalls, access control lists, filters and monitoring software must be used by the Portal
to provide this initial protection to court networks.
Computers that receive and accept filings from the Portal must be protected against
unauthorized network intrusion, viruses, and attacks. These computers interface with the
local CMS to accept e-filings. Software and security devices such as antivirus software,
firewalls, access control lists, filters, and monitoring software must be used to protect the
local court systems.
3.1.10. Filing Process and Payment

The Portal shall support both an interactive filing process and a batch (non-interactive)
process. The Portal shall support electronic payment methods.
3.1.11. Transmission Envelope

Any electronic document or information submitted through the Portal with an initial
filing or any subsequent case action must be transmitted using a data structure that
1
Document(s) that cannot be opened or read
provides universal access to the court file. A submission, whether consisting of a single
document or multiple documents, shall not exceed 50 megabytes (50 MB) in size.
The Portal shall be capable of providing a validation of the submission to detect any
discrepancies (e.g., incomplete data or unacceptable document type) or other problems
(e.g., viruses) prior to being received by the Portal. Where possible, the filer will be
notified immediately if the Portal detects discrepancies or other problems with the
submission, based on technical issues. The validation rules will be specific to the type of
submission (for example: new case initiation as opposed to filings in an existing case).
3.1.12. Court Control of Court Documents - Data Storage

The official copy of court data must be physically located in Florida and in the custody of
the clerks of court. Copies of data may be stored within or outside the State of Florida
for the purposes of disaster recovery of business continuity.
3.1.13. Requirements for Individual Filers
3.1.13.1 Embedded Hyperlink

Hyperlinks embedded within a filing should refer only to information within the same
document, or to external documents or information sources that are reasonably
believed to be trustworthy and stable over long periods of time. Hyperlinks should
not be used to refer to external documents or information sources likely to change.
3.1.13.2 Exhibits
Each exhibit accompanying a document shall be separately attached and denominated
with a title referencing the document to which it relates. Each exhibit shall conform
to the filing size limitation in Section 3.1.1. To the extent an exhibit exceeds the size
limitation each portion shall be separately described as being a portion of the whole
exhibit (e.g., Exhibit A, Part 1 of 5, Part 2 of 5, etc.).
Each documentary exhibit marked for identification or admitted into evidence at trial
shall be treated in accordance with Florida Rule of Judicial Administration
2.525(d)(4) or (6), and then converted by the clerk and stored electronically in
accordance with rule 2.525(a).
3.1.13.3 Confidentiality and Sensitive Information

The Portal shall provide the following warning before documents are submitted
through the Portal, “WARNING: As an attorney or self-represented filer, you are
responsible to protect confidential information under Florida Rules of Judicial
Administration 2.420 and 2.425. Before you file, please ensure that you have
complied with these rules, including the need to complete a Notice of Confidential
Information form or motion required under Rule 2.420 regarding confidential
information. Your failure to comply with these rules may subject you to sanctions.”
3.1.13.4 Emergency Filing

The Portal must provide a mechanism to indicate that a filing is an emergency.
3.1.14. Adding a Party
The Portal shall facilitate the addition of parties after the initial pleading is filed.
3.1.15. Docket Numbering

 At a minimum, the local clerk CMS would assign and store a sequence number
for each docket entry that contains a document on each case. The sequence
number would be unique only within each case. For example, each case will start
with 1, 2, 3, etc. and increment by 1.
 The sequence number would be displayed on each document/docket display
screen in the local clerk CMS and any associated access systems (websites, etc.)
 Each assigned document/docket sequence number would need to remain static for
each case once assigned. If documents/dockets are inserted, then the sequence
numbers would not necessarily align with the dates for the documents/docket. As
long as they are unique within each case this would be allowed.
 The sequence number may be implemented on a “go-forward” basis if necessary;
sequence numbers are not required for historical documents/dockets.
 The sequence numbers are only assigned and stored in the local clerk CMS. The
sequence numbers would not be included in the interface between the Portal and
the local clerk CMS and would not be provided to the filer as part of the e-filing
notification process.
 This requirement does not apply to legacy CMS applications which have a known
end date.
3.2. TECHNICAL FAILURE

3.2.1. Retransmission of Electronic Filing
If, within 24 hours after filing information electronically, the filer discovers that the
version of the document available for viewing through the Electronic Case Filing System
is incomplete, garbled or otherwise does not depict the document as transmitted, the filer
shall notify the Clerk of Court immediately and retransmit the filing if necessary.
3.2.2. System Availability and Recovery Planning

Computer systems that are used for e-filings must protect electronically filed documents
against system and security failures during periods of system availability. Additionally,
contingencies for system failures and disaster recovery mechanisms must be established.
Scheduled downtime for maintenance and updates should be planned, and a notification
shall be provided to filers in advance of the outage. Planned outages shall occur outside
normal business hours as determined by the Chief Judicial Administrative Officer of the
Court. E-filing systems shall comply with the security and backup policies created by the
Florida Courts Technology Commission.
Plan 1: Contingency Plan
Timeframe: Immediate - during normal working hours.
Scope: Localized system failures while court is still open and operational. This plan will
also be put into operation when Continuity of Operations (“COOP”) and Disaster Plans
are implemented.
Operational Levels: Levels of operation will be temporarily limited and may be

conducted in electronic or manual processes. Since court will still be open, this plan
must address how documents will be received while the system is down.
Objectives:
 Allow the court to continue with minimum delays by providing a temporary
alternate solution for access to court files.
 Conduct tests to verify the restoration process.
 Have local and local off site backup of the operating system, application software,
and user data available for immediate recovery operations.
 Identify areas where redundancy is required to reduce downtime, and provide for
“hot” standby equipment that can be utilized in the event the Contingency Plan is
activated.
Plan 2: Business Continuity/Disaster Recovery
Timeframe: Disaster dependent, varies.
Scope: Declared disasters either local or regional that impact the geographic area.
Operational Levels: Temporarily unavailable or limited until facilities are deemed

functional or alternate facilities can be established. Mission Essential Functions as
defined in the Supreme Court’s COOP for the affected area must be addressed in the
designated priorities and timeframes.
Objectives:
 Allow court operations to recover in the existing location or alternate facility.
 Provide cooperative efforts with impacted entities to establish access to court files
and allow for the continuance of court proceedings.
 Provide in the Contingency Plan a temporary method to meet or exceed Mission
Essential Functions identified in the Supreme Court’s COOP.
 Provide another tier level of recoverability by having a backup copy of the
operating system, application software, and user data in a protected environment
outside of the local area not subject to the same risks as the primary location for
purposes of recovery according to standards approved by the FCTC.
 This plan may provide another out-of-state tier for data backup provided that the
non-local in-state tier is established.
3.3. ADA AND TECHNOLOGY COMPLIANCE

All Court technology must comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act (“ADA”).
3.4. ELECTRONIC PROCESSES - JUDICIAL
The integrity of and efficient delivery of information to the judiciary are primary goals. Any
electronic processes that involve the judiciary must be approved by the judiciary prior to
implementation.
3.4.1. Delivery of Electronic Case Files
An electronic case file being provided to the court should meet or exceed the capabilities
and ease of use provided by a paper case file. Electronic documents shall be available to
court officers and personnel in a manner that provides timely and easy access, and shall
not have a negative operational impact on the court. The court shall have the opportunity
to review and approve any changes to the current business process before the system may
be implemented.
Any system that intends to deliver electronic files instead of paper files in part or in total
that impacts the judiciary, that involves electronic workflow, functionality, and electronic
document management service must be approved by the judiciary before the paper files
may be discontinued. The Clerk of Court must be able to deliver paper case files upon
request until the electronic case file delivery system is fully accepted by the judiciary.
The electronic file created by the Clerk of Court shall be made available and delivered to
the judiciary in a manner that provides improved workflow and document management
service to the judiciary and court staff. At a minimum, the system must have search
capability to find cases, have the ability to incorporate digital signatures, the ability to
attach notes to cases, and be able to print specific portions or all pages of a document.
The system must have logging capabilities for events such as failures, outages, correction
of case file numbers, deletion of documents, and rejections due to incorrect filing or
unusable documents due to poor quality images. Documents in an electronic file shall be
available for viewing by the court immediately upon acceptance and validation by the
clerk of court.
The court must validate that the electronic case file is accurate, reliable, timely, and
provides needed reporting information, and is otherwise acceptable as part of its review
and acceptance process.
3.5. ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES
3.5.1. Signatures of Registered Users
A submission by a registered user is not required to bear the electronic image of the handwritten
signature or an encrypted signature of the filer. Electronic signatures may be used in place of a
handwritten signature unless otherwise prohibited by law. The information contained in the
signature block shall meet the following required elements defined in Rule 2.515(a) and (b),
Florida Rules of Judicial Administration. Electronic signature formats of s/, /s or /s/ are
acceptable. Additional information is optional.
Attorney Example
s/ John Doe
Bar Number 12345
123 South Street
City, FL 12345
Telephone: (123) 123-4567
ProSe Example
s/ Jane Doe
123 North Street
City, FL 12345
Telephone: (123) 123-4567
3.5.2. Multiple Attorneys of Record Signatures

When a filing requires the signatures of two or more attorneys of record:
The filing attorney shall initially confirm that the content of the document is
acceptable to all attorneys required to sign the document and shall obtain the
signatures of all attorneys on the document. For this purpose, physical, facsimile,
or electronic signatures are permitted.
The filing attorney then shall file the document electronically, indicating the
signatories, (e.g., “s/ Jane Doe,” “/s John Smith,” “/s/ Jane Doe Smith,” etc.) for
each attorney’s signature.
3.5.3. Original Documents or Handwritten Signatures

Original documents, such as death certificates, or those that contain original signatures such as
affidavits, deeds, mortgages and wills must be filed manually until further standards have been
adopted.
3.5.4. Judge Signature

Judges are authorized to electronically sign all orders and judgments. If digitized signatures of
judges are stored, they are to be placed at a minimum 256 bit encryption and protected by user
authentication.
3.5.4.1. Security
An electronic signature of a judge shall be accompanied by a date, time stamp, and the
case number. The date, time stamp, and case number shall appear as a watermark
through the signature to prevent copying the signature to another document. The date,
time stamp, and case number shall also appear below the signature and not be obscured
by the signature. When possible or required, the case number should be included also.
Applications that store digitized signatures must store signatures in compliance with FIPS
140-2.
3.5.4.2. Functionality
The ability to affix a judicial signature on documents must include functionality that
would improve the process. This functionality at a minimum should include the
following:
1. The ability to prioritize documents for signature.

2. Allow multiple documents to be reviewed and signed in a batch in addition to
individually.
3. The judge must have the ability to review and edit, reject, sign and file
documents.
4. Have a standard signature block size on the document.
5. Allow forwarding of queued documents to another judge for signature if the
primary judge is unavailable.
6. After documents are signed or rejected, they should be removed from the
queue.
7. Have the ability to electronically file the signed documents into the case
management system to be electronically distributed to all appropriate parties.
3.5.5 Clerk Signature

Unless otherwise required by law, Clerks and Deputy Clerks are authorized to electronically sign
any documents that require the signature of the clerk, subject to the same security requirements
that apply to a judge signature under standard 3.5.4.1.
3.6 ELECTRONIC NOTARIZATION

Electronic notarization is authorized as provided in Florida Statute 117.021.
FIFTH DISTRICT
NEIL J. GILLESPIE, INDIVIDUALLY,

AND AS FORMER TRUSTEE OF THE
FEBRUARY 10, 1997,
Appellant,
v. CASE NO. 5D17-2665
REVERSE MORTGAGE
SOLUTIONS, INC.,
Appellee.
________________________/
DATE: December 29, 2017
Court’s Order of November 21, 2017, is denied. Failure to serve the Initial Brief within
20 days of the date hereof will result in a dismissal without further notice.

cc:

5DCA CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the instrument(s)
filed in this office.
Witness my hand and official seal this January 17, 2018 .
Joanne P. Simmons, Clerk of the Fifth District Court of Appeal.
By: /s/ Kathy Palmere

JAY P. COHEN
CHIEF JUDGE JOANNE P. SIMMONS
CLERK
THOMAS D. SAWAYA
WILLIAM D. PALMER
RICHARD B. ORFINGER CHARLES R. CRAWFORD
MARSHAL
VINCENT G. TORPY, JR
KERRY I. EVANDER DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
WENDY W. BERGER FIFTH DISTRICT
F. RAND WALLIS
300 SOUTH BEACH STREET
BRIAN D. LAMBERT
DAYTONA BEACH, FLORIDA 32114
JAMES A. EDWARDS
ERIC J. EISNAUGLE (386) 947-1500 COURT
JUDGES (386) 255-8600 CLERK
January 17, 2018
Hon. John A. Tomasino, Clerk

Supreme Court of Florida
500 South Duval Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1927
Re: Gillespie Appeal No. 5D17-2665

v. Trial Court No: 2013-CA-000115
Reverse Mortgage Solutions Trial Court Judge: HON. ANN MELINDA CRAGGS
Dear Hon. Tomasino:
Attached is a certified copy of the Notice invoking the discretionary jurisdiction of the Supreme
Court pursuant to Rule 9.120, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, along with a copy of this
Court's opinion or decision relevant to this case.
The filing fee prescribed by Section 25.241(3), Florida Statutes, was received by
this court and will be forwarded.
The filing fee prescribed by Section 25.241(3), Florida Statutes, was not received
by this Court.
Petitioner/Appellant has been previously determined insolvent by this Circuit Court

or our court.
No filing fee is required because:
Summary Appeal (Rule 9.141)
Unemployment Appeals Commission
Habeas Corpus
Juvenile case
Other _ _ __________________
Sincerely,
JOANNE P. SIMMONS, CLERK
By: /s/ Kathy Palmere

Deputy Clerk
Attachments
cc: Neil J. Gillespie Curtis A. Wilson
FAX NUMBER (386) 947-1562

E MAIL ADDRESS 5dca@flcourts.org

Appendix 1, Appellant's Notice of Appeal FSC18-116

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

Appendix 1, Appellant's Notice of Appeal FSC18-116

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

NEIL J. GILLESPIE, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS FORMER

LIVING TRUST AGREEMENT DATED FEBRUARY 10, 1997,

v. CASE NO. 5D17-2665

REVERSE MORTGAGE SOLUTIONS, INC.,

APPELLANT’S NOTICE OF APPEAL

Appellant Neil J. Gillespie, an indigent non-lawyer, unable to obtain

adequate counsel, a consumer of legal and court services affecting interstate

commerce, a consumer of personal, family and household goods and services,

consumer transactions in interstate commerce, a person with disabilities, and a

APPELLANT’S NOTICE OF APPEAL, and states:

ORDERED that Appellant’s December 8, 2017, Motion to Vacate This

Panel: Judges Cohen, Wallis, and Eisnaugle

3. Without a proper Record, I am unable to comply with this Court’s Order

4. The Florida Constitution, Article V, Section 2(a) has a requirement that no

SECTION 2. Administration; practice and procedure.—

5. I move to toll time during the pendency of this appeal, 5D17-2665.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED January 17, 2018

Curtis Wilson, Esq. Colleen Murphy Davis, Asst. U.S. Attorney

Justin R. Infurna, Esq., LL.M

Development & Construction Corporation Oak Run Homeowners Association, Inc.

STATE OF FLORIDA ) 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111

sworn deposed upon oath as follows:

personal knowledge unless otherwise expressly stated.

1997 (hereinafter "Trust").

7013-007-00 I, legal description:

transferring the property to the beneficiary without going through probate.

Book6161/Page1844 CFN#2015009748 Page 1 of 2

value of the trust. property is insufficient to justify the cost of administration.

FURTHER AFFIANT SA YETH NOT,

truthful to the best of his knowledge, information and belief.

My Commission Expires: --2J......;;J;_~-=-

Book6161/Page1845 CFN#2015009748 Page 2 of 2

NEIL J. GILLESPIE, INDIVIDUALLY,

v. CASE NO. 5D17-2665

DATE: December 29, 2017

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

ORDERED that Appellant’s December 8, 2017, Motion to Vacate This

I hereby certify that the foregoing is

Panel: Judges Cohen, Wallis, and Eisnaugle

Curtis A Wilson Neil J Gillespie

v. CASE NO. 5D17-2665

APPELLANT’S MOTION TO VACATE THIS COURT’S

1997 (“Terminated Trust”), an indigent non-lawyer, unable to obtain adequate

counsel, a consumer of legal and court services affecting interstate commerce, a

consumer of personal, family and household goods and services, consumer

transactions in interstate commerce, a person with disabilities, a vulnerable adult,

To Vacate This Court’s Order of November 21, 2017, and states:

A. The Record Is Not Complete. (Rule 9.200, Fla. R. App. Pro.)

A. The Record Is Not Complete. (Rule 9.200, Fla. R. App. Pro.)

ORDERED that Appellant’s November 6, 2017, Response is treated as a

3. The Order at Exhibit 1 was entered by a panel of three judges:

CHIEF JUDGE JAY PAUL COHEN

4. My response November 6, 2017 was “APPELLANT’S RESPONSE TO

SHOW CAUSE ORDER OF OCT-27-2017”. It was not a motion to correct the

record. Therefore I was denied due process to submit a proper motion.

I am unable to serve the Initial Brief up to and including December 8, 2017.

7. Rule 9.200(e), Duties of Appellant or Petitioner, states:

was in the process of complying with Rule 9.200(e), Duties of Appellant or

Petitioner, and preparing a motion to correct the record.

• Judge Jay P. Cohen, Chief Judge, Fifth District Court of Appeal

10. My email of November 14, 2017 appears at Exhibit 2, with 5 attachments:

• 2017, 11-13-17, EMAIL PRR response from Greg Harrell