VIA UPS No.

: 1Z64589FP299444151 June 2, 2020

Via email: avazquez@floridabar.org

Algeisa Vazquez
Branch UPL Counsel
The Florida Bar
Lakeshore Plaza II
1300 Concord Terrace, Suite 130
Sunrise, Florida 33323

Re: Unlicensed Practice of Law Investigation of Marty Stone

File No. 20191041(17A)

Dear Ms. Vazquez:

Thank you for you letter of April 29, 2020 in the above captioned matter, copy enclosed.

The Florida Bar closed its file in the UPL Investigation of Marty Stone be accepting his Cease
and Desist Affidavit. Mr. Stone claimed to be the managing partner and CEO of the law firm
McCalla Raymer Leibert Pierce, LLC. (MRLP). The Fla. Division of Corporation records show
Mr. Stone as the sole managing partner of MRLP from April 2, 2018 through March 30, 2020.

A Foreign Limited Liability Company is a legal fiction governed by law, which MRLP relied
upon to operate a law firm in Florida. However, Mr. Stone’s Cease and Desist Affidavit shows
he knowingly broke the law (while not admitting guilt) and in doing so fatally undermined the
legal authority of MRLP to operate a law firm in Florida. A reasonable person could conclude
that MRLP and Mr. Stone acted with malice aforethought to undermine the legal authority of
MRLP to operate a law firm in Florida for the purpose of avoiding liability for its tortious
behavior as a foreclosure mill, and as in my foreclosure, in the deprivation of civil rights under
color of law (18 U.S.C. § 242).

Mr. Stone was essentially given a pass by The Florida Bar. UPL is a felony of the third degree,
Fla. Stat. § 454.23. Attorney Brian Willis notes, “It is well recognized that a corporation, unlike
a natural person, cannot represent itself and cannot appear in a court of law without an attorney.
Szteinbaum v. Kaes Inversiones y Valores, C.A., 476 So. 2d 247, 248 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
https://www.floridacivpro.com/reporter/2010/12/07/corporation_cannot_represent_i/

MRLP is a Foreign Limited Liability Company (LLC). Attorney Cynthia Conlin notes, “It is
established law that a business entity (Corporation or LLC) cannot represent itself, pro se, in
court proceedings but rather must appear through an attorney. http://conlinpa.com/2013/12/15/corporations-
cannot-operate-pro-se-in-small-claims-post-collection-proceedings-court-says/

Nonlawyer Mr. Stone, as the managing partner and CEO of MRLP (Florida), was unable to
comply with Rule 4-5.1 Responsibilities of Partners, Managers, and Supervisory Lawyers,
https://www-media.floridabar.org/uploads/2020/05/Ch-4-2020_10-APR-RRTFB-4-9-20.pdf
Algeisa Vazquez June 2, 2020
Branch UPL Counsel

RULE 4-5.1 RESPONSIBILITIES OF PARTNERS, MANAGERS, AND

SUPERVISORY LAWYERS

(a) Duties Concerning Adherence to Rules of Professional Conduct. A partner in a law

firm, and a lawyer who individually or together with other lawyers possesses comparable
managerial authority in a law firm, shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that the firm
has in effect measures giving reasonable assurance that all lawyers therein conform to the
Rules of Professional Conduct.

(b) Supervisory Lawyer’s Duties. Any lawyer having direct supervisory authority over
another lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that the other lawyer conforms to
the Rules of Professional Conduct.

(c) Responsibility for Rules Violations. A lawyer shall be responsible for another
lawyer’s violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct if:
(1) the lawyer orders the specific conduct or, with knowledge thereof, ratifies the
conduct involved; or
(2) the lawyer is a partner or has comparable managerial authority in the law firm in
which the other lawyer practices or has direct supervisory authority over the other
lawyer, and knows of the conduct at a time when its consequences can be avoided or
mitigated but fails to take reasonable remedial action

Also see the lengthily comment to Rule 4-5.1.

Lack of compliance with Rule 4-5.1 at MRLP led to a breakdown on the rule of law, which in
turn harmed the public. I know from personal experience that Florida lawyers at MRLP were
impervious to complaints of misconduct. In State v. Sperry, 140 So.2nd 587, 595 (Fla., 1962),
the Court noted that the reason behind prohibiting the unlicensed practice of law is “to protect
the public...” With MRLP, an entire law firm was led by a manager and CEO engaged in UPL.
Nonlawyer management gave free reign to misconduct by subordinate lawyers, who in turn
violated Rule 4-5.2 with impunity, aided and abetted by the discipline arm of The Florida Bar.

Previously I suggested to FSC Clerk John Tomasino that the Florida Supreme Court strike every
pleading filed by or on behalf of MRLP for the period April 2, 2018 through March 30, 2020,
and investigate the status of MRLP prior to April 2, 2018. Mr. Tomasino emailed me,

The Court will not be taking any action on your below request. We do not conduct case
business over email. Only filings submitted via the statewide portal, or via delivery, for
docketing in an existing case or for set up as a new case, will be considered by the Court.
I regret I am unable to be of further assistance.

I thanked Mr. Tomasino for his response, and asked, “What type of filing do you suggest?” I do
not show a reply from him. Okay, fine. I am in the middle of two appeals regarding the
foreclosure, and efforts like this letter may point to the type of filing required.

2
Algeisa Vazquez June 2, 2020
Branch UPL Counsel

I look forward to your response.

Sincerely,
/s/
Neil J. Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
Tel. 352-854-7807
Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net

See, https://nosueorg.blogspot.com/2020/05/cease-and-desist-upl-of-marty-stone.html

Enclosures

Cc: John Tomasino, FSC, tomasino@flcourts.org

Brian Willis, bwillisz@amazon.com
Cynthia Conlin, attorney@conlinpa.com

3
 The Florida Bar
Lakeshore Plaza II
1300 Concord Terrace, Suite 130
Sunrise, Florida 33323
Joshua E. Doyle (954) 835-0233
Executive Director www.FLORIDABAR.org

April 29, 2020

Mr. Neil J. Gillespie

8092 S.W. 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481

Re: Unlicensed Practice of Law Investigation of Marty Stone

File No. 20191041(17A)

Dear Mr. Gillespie:

In December 2018, you filed an unlicensed practice of law complaint against the above­
referenced individual. The Seventeentll Circuit Unlicensed Practice of Law Committee "A"
closed the case based on the acceptance of an affidavit. The affidavit does not require the
individual to admit any wrongdoing, however, the individual agrees not to engage in any
activities which constitute the unlicensed practice of law under existing decisions of the Supreme
Court of Florida.

Thank you for bringing this matter to the attention of The Florida Bar. If you have any questions
concerning the Committee's action, please feel free to contact me. We will respond to your
public records request by separate cover.

Sincerely,

Algeisa Vazquez
Branch UPL Branch

AV/mdw
6/1/2020 Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

Select Year:   2019 Go

The 2019 Florida Statutes

Title XXXII Chapter 454 View Entire Chapter

REGULATION OF PROFESSIONS AND OCCUPATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW
454.23 Penalties.—Any person not licensed or otherwise authorized to practice law in this state who
practices law in this state or holds himself or herself out to the public as qualified to practice law in this state,
or who willfully pretends to be, or willfully takes or uses any name, title, addition, or description implying that
he or she is qualified, or recognized by law as qualified, to practice law in this state, commits a felony of the
third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
History.—s. 21, ch. 10175, 1925; CGL 8133; s. 384, ch. 71-136; s. 1, ch. 74-128; s. 184, ch. 97-103; s. 1, ch. 2004-287.

Copyright © 1995-2020 The Florida Legislature • Privacy Statement • Contact Us

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0400-0499/0454/Sections/0454.23.html 1/1
methods of obtaining evidence from third persons and unwarranted intrusions into privileged
relationships, such as the client-lawyer relationship.

Subdivision (b) recognizes that lawyers sometimes receive a document or electronically

stored information that was mistakenly sent or produced by opposing parties or their lawyers. A
document or electronically stored information is inadvertently sent when it is accidentally
transmitted, such as when an e-mail or letter is misaddressed or a document or electronically
stored information is accidentally included with information that was intentionally transmitted.
If a lawyer knows or reasonably should know that a document or electronically stored
information was sent inadvertently, then this rule requires the lawyer to promptly notify the
sender in order to permit that person to take protective measures. Whether the lawyer is required
to take additional steps, such as returning the document or electronically stored information, is a
matter of law beyond the scope of these rules, as is the question of whether the privileged status
of a document or electronically stored information has been waived. Similarly, this rule does not
address the legal duties of a lawyer who receives a document that the lawyer knows or
reasonably should know may have been wrongfully obtained by the sending person. For
purposes of this rule, “document or electronically stored information” includes, in addition to
paper documents, e-mail and other forms of electronically stored information, including
embedded data (commonly referred to as “metadata”), that is subject to being read or put into
readable form. Metadata in electronic documents creates an obligation under this rule only if the
receiving lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the metadata was inadvertently sent to
the receiving lawyer.

Some lawyers may choose to return a document or delete electronically stored information
unread, for example, when the lawyer learns before receiving the document that it was
inadvertently sent. Where a lawyer is not required by applicable law to do so, the decision to
voluntarily return the document or delete electronically stored information is a matter of
professional judgment ordinarily reserved to the lawyer. See rules 4-1.2 and 4-1.4.

Amended July 23, 1992, effective January 1, 1993 (605 So.2d 252); March 23, 2006, effective May 22, 2006
(933 So.2d 417); amended May 21, 2015, corrected June 25, 2015, effective October 1, 2015 (164 So.3d
1217).

4-5. LAW FIRMS AND ASSOCIATIONS

RULE 4-5.1 RESPONSIBILITIES OF PARTNERS, MANAGERS, AND SUPERVISORY
LAWYERS

(a) Duties Concerning Adherence to Rules of Professional Conduct. A partner in a law

firm, and a lawyer who individually or together with other lawyers possesses comparable
managerial authority in a law firm, shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that the firm has in
effect measures giving reasonable assurance that all lawyers therein conform to the Rules of
Professional Conduct.

(b) Supervisory Lawyer’s Duties. Any lawyer having direct supervisory authority over
another lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that the other lawyer conforms to the
Rules of Professional Conduct.

RRTFB April 9, 2020

 (c) Responsibility for Rules Violations. A lawyer shall be responsible for another
lawyer’s violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct if:

(1) the lawyer orders the specific conduct or, with knowledge thereof, ratifies the
conduct involved; or

(2) the lawyer is a partner or has comparable managerial authority in the law firm in
which the other lawyer practices or has direct supervisory authority over the other lawyer,
and knows of the conduct at a time when its consequences can be avoided or mitigated but
fails to take reasonable remedial action.

Comment

Subdivision (a) applies to lawyers who have managerial authority over the professional
work of a firm. See terminology. This includes members of a partnership, the shareholders in a
law firm organized as a professional corporation, and members of other associations authorized
to practice law; lawyers having comparable managerial authority in a legal services organization
or a law department of an enterprise or government agency, and lawyers who have intermediate
managerial responsibilities in a firm. Subdivision (b) applies to lawyers who have supervisory
authority over the work of other lawyers in a firm.

Subdivision (a) requires lawyers with managerial authority within a firm to make reasonable
efforts to establish internal policies and procedures designed to provide reasonable assurance that
all lawyers in the firm will conform to the Rules of Professional Conduct. Such policies and
procedures include those designed to detect and resolve conflicts of interest, identify dates by
which actions must be taken in pending matters, account for client funds and property, and
ensure that inexperienced lawyers are properly supervised.

Other measures that may be required to fulfill the responsibility prescribed in subdivision (a)
can depend on the firm’s structure and the nature of its practice. In a small firm of experienced
lawyers, informal supervision and periodic review of compliance with the required systems
ordinarily will suffice. In a large firm, or in practice situations in which difficult ethical
problems frequently arise, more elaborate measures may be necessary. Some firms, for example,
have a procedure whereby junior lawyers can make confidential referral of ethical problems
directly to a designated supervising lawyer or special committee. See rule 4-5.2. Firms, whether
large or small, may also rely on continuing legal education in professional ethics. In any event
the ethical atmosphere of a firm can influence the conduct of all its members and the partners
may not assume that all lawyers associated with the firm will inevitably conform to the rules.

Subdivision (c) expresses a general principle of personal responsibility for acts of another.
See also rule 4-8.4(a).

Subdivision (c)(2) defines the duty of a partner or other lawyer having comparable
managerial authority in a law firm, as well as a lawyer having supervisory authority over
performance of specific legal work by another lawyer. Whether a lawyer has such supervisory
authority in particular circumstances is a question of fact. Partners and lawyers with comparable
authority have at least indirect responsibility for all work being done by the firm, while a partner
or manager in charge of a particular matter ordinarily also has supervisory responsibility for the

RRTFB April 9, 2020

work of other firm lawyers engaged in the matter. Appropriate remedial action by a partner or
managing lawyer would depend on the immediacy of that lawyer’s involvement and the
seriousness of the misconduct. A supervisor is required to intervene to prevent avoidable
consequences of misconduct if the supervisor knows that the misconduct occurred. Thus, if a
supervising lawyer knows that a subordinate misrepresented a matter to an opposing party in
negotiation, the supervisor as well as the subordinate has a duty to correct the resulting
misapprehension.

Professional misconduct by a lawyer under supervision could reveal a violation of

subdivision (b) on the part of the supervisory lawyer even though it does not entail a violation of
subdivision (c) because there was no direction, ratification, or knowledge of the violation.

Apart from this rule and rule 4-8.4(a), a lawyer does not have disciplinary liability for the
conduct of a partner, shareholder, member of a limited liability company, officer, director,
manager, associate, or subordinate. Whether a lawyer may be liable civilly or criminally for
another lawyer’s conduct is a question of law beyond the scope of these rules.

The duties imposed by this rule on managing and supervising lawyers do not alter the
personal duty of each lawyer in a firm to abide by the Rules of Professional Conduct. See rule 4-
5.2(a).

Amended July 23, 1992, effective January 1, 1993 (605 So.2d 252); amended September 24, 1998, effective
Oct. 1, 1998 (718 So.2d 1179); March 23, 2006, effective May 22, 2006 (933 So.2d 417).

RULE 4-5.2 RESPONSIBILITIES OF A SUBORDINATE LAWYER

(a) Rules of Professional Conduct Apply. A lawyer is bound by the Rules of Professional
Conduct notwithstanding that the lawyer acted at the direction of another person.

(b) Reliance on Supervisor’s Opinion. A subordinate lawyer does not violate the Rules of
Professional Conduct if that lawyer acts in accordance with a supervisory lawyer’s reasonable
resolution of an arguable question of professional duty.

Comment

Although a lawyer is not relieved of responsibility for a violation by the fact that the lawyer
acted at the direction of a supervisor, that fact may be relevant in determining whether a lawyer
had the knowledge required to render conduct a violation of the rules. For example, if a
subordinate filed a frivolous pleading at the direction of a supervisor, the subordinate would not
be guilty of a professional violation unless the subordinate knew of the document’s frivolous
character.

When lawyers in a supervisor-subordinate relationship encounter a matter involving

professional judgment as to ethical duty, the supervisor may assume responsibility for making
the judgment. Otherwise a consistent course of action or position could not be taken. If the
question can reasonably be answered only 1 way, the duty of both lawyers is clear and they are
equally responsible for fulfilling it. However, if the question is reasonably arguable, someone

RRTFB April 9, 2020

has to decide upon the course of action. That authority ordinarily reposes in the supervisor, and
a subordinate may be guided accordingly. For example, if a question arises whether the interests
of 2 clients conflict under rule 4-1.7, the supervisor’s reasonable resolution of the question
should protect the subordinate professionally if the resolution is subsequently challenged.

Amended July 23, 1992, effective January 1, 1993 (605 So.2d 252).

RULE 4-5.3 RESPONSIBILITIES REGARDING NONLAWYER ASSISTANTS

(a) Use of Titles by Nonlawyer Assistants. A person who uses the title of paralegal, legal
assistant, or other similar term when offering or providing services to the public must work for or
under the direction or supervision of a lawyer or law firm.

(b) Supervisory Responsibility. With respect to a nonlawyer employed or retained by or

associated with a lawyer or an authorized business entity as defined elsewhere in these Rules
Regulating The Florida Bar:

(1) a partner, and a lawyer who individually or together with other lawyers possesses
comparable managerial authority in a law firm, must make reasonable efforts to ensure that
the firm has in effect measures giving reasonable assurance that the person’s conduct is
compatible with the professional obligations of the lawyer;

(2) a lawyer having direct supervisory authority over the nonlawyer must make
reasonable efforts to ensure that the person’s conduct is compatible with the professional
obligations of the lawyer; and

(3) a lawyer is responsible for conduct of such a person that would be a violation of the
Rules of Professional Conduct if engaged in by a lawyer if the lawyer:

(A) orders or, with the knowledge of the specific conduct, ratifies the conduct
involved; or

(B) is a partner or has comparable managerial authority in the law firm in which
the person is employed, or has direct supervisory authority over the person, and knows
of the conduct at a time when its consequences can be avoided or mitigated but fails to
take reasonable remedial action.

(c) Ultimate Responsibility of Lawyer. Although paralegals or legal assistants may

perform the duties delegated to them by the lawyer without the presence or active involvement of
the lawyer, the lawyer must review and be responsible for the work product of the paralegals or
legal assistants.

Comment

Lawyers generally employ assistants in their practice, including secretaries, investigators,

law student interns, and paraprofessionals such as paralegals and legal assistants. Such
assistants, whether employees or independent contractors, act for the lawyer in rendition of the

RRTFB April 9, 2020

6/2/2020 Create a Shipment | UPS - United States

UPS Internet Shipping: View /Print Label

1. Ensure there are no other shipping or tracking labels attached to your package. Select the Print button on
the print dialog box that appears. Note: If your brow ser does not support this function select Print from the File menu to
print the label.

2. Fold the printed label at the solid line below . Place the label in a UPS Shipping Pouch. If you do not have a pouch,
affix the folded label using clear plastic shipping tape over the entire label.

3. GETTING YOUR SHIPMENT TO UPS

Custom ers w ith a Daily Pickup
Your driver w ill pickup your shipment(s) as usual.

Custom ers w ithout a Daily Pickup

Take your package to any location of The UPS Store®, UPS Access Point(TM) location, UPS Drop Box, UPS Customer
Center, Staples® or Authorized Shipping Outlet near you. Items sent via UPS Return Services(SM) (including via Ground)
are also accepted at Drop Boxes. To find the location nearest you, please visit the 'Find Locations' Quick link at ups.com.
Schedule a same day or future day Pickup to have a UPS driver pickup all of your Internet Shipping packages.
Hand the package to any UPS driver in your area.
UPS Access Point T M UPS Access Point T M UPS Access Point T M
THE UPS STORE CVS STORE # 5921 THE UPS STORE
11100 SW 93RD COURT RD 10255 SW 86TH CIR 3101 SW 34TH AVE
OCALA ,FL 34481 OCALA ,FL 34481 OCALA ,FL 34474

FOLD HERE

https://www.ups.com/uis/create?ActionOriginPair=default___PrintWindowPage&key=labelWindow&type=html&loc=en_US&instr=A&doc=shipment_1921759728:l… 1/1