IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALFOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT, FLORIDA

NEIL J. GILLESPIE, ETC., APPEAL NO. 5D15-0340PETITION NO. 5D15-0341

Petitioner/Appellant,L.T. 2013-CA-000115

VS. 42-2013-CA-000115-AXXX-XXMARION COUNTY, FLORIDA

REVERSE MORTGAGE SOLUTIONS, INC., Residential Home Foreclosure Case

Florida Homestead of Neil J. GillespieRespondent/Appellees.

_______________________________________ /

PETITIONER/APPELLANT RESPONSE TONotice of New Requirement When Filing Notice of Appeal

Petitioner/Appellant pro se Neil J. Gillespie, an indigent/insolvent nonlawyer, a person

with disabilities, and consumer of legal and court services affecting interstate commerce,

henceforth in the first person, states as follows:

1. On Friday April 24, 2015 at 4.36pm I received by email (Exhibit 1) from the Clerk,

NOTICE Informing the Appellate Court of Pending Motions Postponing Rendition attime of Filing the Notice of Appeal, April 10, 2015

2. I thank the Clerk for brining this Notice to my attention, as it may affect,

APPEAL NO. 5D15-0340; PETITION NO. 5D15-0341

I plan additional filings today in Appeal No. 5D15-0340, and Petition No. 5D15-0341.

Table of Contents

P.2 Previous information notice in Petition No. 5D15-0341 by email April 8, 2015P.2 Appendix 13 RE: Judge Stancil’s Driver’s License Competence Test for Title II ADAP.2 Appendix 14, WRAT-R2 test (Wide Range Achievement Test-R2)P.2 Appendix 11, Constitutional Access to Courts, Justice, and Redress; Rule 4-1.1P.3 Competence; Rule 4-1.3 Diligence; Fla. Stat. § 413.30(2) disability determinationsP.4 Appendix 15, Vol. 31, Insurance (Disability), Florida Jurisprudence 2d (2007)P.11 Appendix 28, Audio Files (.wav) on CD-ROM 14P.11 Appendix 21, AmeriFace refused to provide name of counsel 63pP.12 Appendix 22, Citibank, N.A. Best Buy Account; Amazon.com, Synchrony BankP.12 Appendix 24, SCOTUS No. 13-7280 159p; C.A.11 failed 13-11585-B & 28 USC § 1651

2

Previous information notice in Petition No. 5D15-0341 by email April 8, 2015

3. Previously I gave informal notice in Petition No. 5D15-0341 by email (Exhibit 2) on

April 8, 2015 to the Clerk, et al,

I am still working on the petition, it is taking longer than planned due to disability, andthe amount of work involved, such as twenty or so appendices. Please find attachedAppendix Volume No. 13 to refute the same wrong Driver’s License Competence Testfor Title II ADA advanced by you and Judge Stancil.

Appendix Volume No. 13 (Rule 9.220), Amended Petition For Writ of ProhibitionRE: Judge Stancil’s Driver’s License Competence Test for Title II ADA

The final edit of Appendix No. 13 accompanies this pleading for filing.

4. Previously I gave informal notice in Petition No. 5D15-0341 by email (Exhibit 2) on

April 8, 2015 to the Clerk, et al,

Appendix Volume No. 14 (Rule 9.220), Amended Petition For Writ of Prohibition, willshow significant loss of brain function following traumatic brain injury in 1988, shownby the results a WRAT-R2 test (Wide Range Achievement Test-R2), part of myvocational screening by the Florida Division of Vocational Rehabilitation in 1993/1994.

I expect to finish Appendix Volume No. 14 soon, perhaps as early as today.

5. Previously I gave informal notice in Petition No. 5D15-0341 by email (Exhibit 2) on

April 8, 2015 to the Clerk, et al,

Appendix 11, AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION - Directory of Law GoverningAppointment of Counsel in FLORIDA Civil Proceedings

The final edit of Appendix No. 11 accompanies this pleading for filing. It has significant changes

from the earlier version, and is renamed “Constitutional Access to Courts, Justice, and Redress”.

Among other things, I am not competent, and not diligent, as defined by the Rules Regulating

The Florida Bar. I am also a person with disabilities.

• Florida Bar Rule 4-1.1 Competence. (Exhibit 3)

3

A lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent representationrequires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and preparation reasonably necessaryfor the representation.

• Florida Bar Rule 4-1.3 Diligence. (Exhibit 4)

A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client.

• Social Security Disability determination (Exhibit 5)

The Social Security Administration, Office of Disability, Notice of Award letter datedAugust 23, 1993 said I met the medical requirements to receive Social Security benefits,and found that I became disabled under its rules on January 17, 1992.

• Fla. Stat. § 413.30(2) disability determinations by other state or federal agencies

413.30(2) Determinations...pursuant to Title II or Title XVI of the Social Security Actshall be considered to have a physical or mental impairment that constitutes or results ina substantial impediment to employment and a significant disability.

Disability and Health Update

6. Previously I gave informal notice in Petition No. 5D15-0341 by email (Exhibit 2) on

April 8, 2015 to the Clerk, et al,

My health continues to decline. Due to indigence I was not able to purchase aprescription costing $422.95 for Lantus Solostar insulin (100 units) see attached. OnMonday April 6, 2015 my doctor interpreted the results of the attached CT scan of mefrom March 16, 2015: C5-6, moderate to severe left neural foramina stenosis due touncovertebral joint hypertrophy. This condition may explain neuropathy in both myhands that makes typing difficult and painful.

Lantus Solostar insulin (100 units) cash cost $422.95 for Neil Gillespie. Exhibit 6.

CT scan March 16, 2015 for Neil Gillespie. Exhibit 7.

7. I am currently being treated for type 2 adult onset diabetes with medication, treatment

that is no longer effective. The attached Accu-Chek Compass One Page Summary Report for the

period ending April 20, 2015 (Exhibit 8) shows my treatment for diabetes is not effective. The

trend graph shows blood glucose levels approaching 500 on April 17, 2015. This level of blood

glucose is disabling. Disability is a barrier to competent (Rule 4-1.1) and diligent (Rule 4-1.3)

4

functioning in this legal matter. Recently my doctor prescribed a lower cost insulin, isophane

(NPH)100 units/ml human recombinant subcutaneous suspension. Exhibit 9. The cost, $122.95 is

still prohibitive. I am not able to purchase this medication at this time due to indigence. In other

words, I do not have $122.95 available in cash or credit.

8. Appendix Volume No. 15 (Rule 9.220, Fla. R. App. P.)Volume 31, Insurance (Disability), Florida Jurisprudence 2d (2007)

31 Fla. Jur. 2d § 2195 (2007), Generally; what constitutes "total disability"

Disability or accident insurance policies, or disability clauses in life insurance policies,may properly restrict their coverage to disability that is "total."[fn1]

"Total disability" is a relative term, depending upon the character of insured's occupation.the capabilities of the insured, and the circumstances of the particular case, [fn2] andwhich must be determined in the context of a liberal construction of the disabilityprovision in order to protect the policyholder. [fn3] However, that term does not requirethat the insured be bedridden or reduced to complete helplessness.[fn4] Whether one istotally disabled is ordinarily a question of fact.[fn5]

Disability provisions are generally of two types: an "occupational disability" clause,which requires only that the insured be unable to perform the duties of his or herparticular occupation in order to recover, and a "general disability" clause, whichconditions the payment of benefits thereunder on the insured's inability to perform theduties of any occupation.[fn6]

[fn1] Am. Jur. 2d, Insurance § 1474[fn2] Groff v. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co., 887 F. Supp. 1515 (S.D. Fla. 1993), relatedreference, 887 F. Supp. 1519 (S.D. Fla. 1994), related reference, 85 F.3d 642 (11th Cir.1996) and related reference, 85 F.3d 643 (11th Cir. 1996); Hazouri v. Travelers Ins. Co.,192 So. 2d 296 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 3d Dist. 1966).[fn3] New England Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Huckins, 127 Fla. 540, 173 So. 696 (1937);Lorber v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 207 So. 2d 305 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 3d Dist. 1968).[fn4] Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of the U.S. v. Neill, 243 F.2d 193 (5th Cir. 1957); Groffv. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co., 887 F. Supp. 1515 (S.D. Fla. 1993), related reference, 887F. Supp. 1519 (S.D. Fla. 1994), related reference, 85 F.3d 642 (11th Cir. 1996) andrelated reference, 85 F.3d 643 (11th Cir. 1996); New York Life Ins. Co. v. Bird, 152 Fla.532, 12 So. 2d 454 (1943); Grauer v. Occidental Life Ins. Co. of California, 363 So. 2d583 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1978).[fn5] New York Life Ins. Co. v. Bird, 152 Fla. 532, 12 So. 2d 454 (1943).[fn6] For general discussion of such clauses, see §§ 19566, 2197.

5

31 Fla. Jur. 2d § 2196 (2007), Occupational disability

A typical occupational disability provision requires that the insured be unable to performthe duties pertaining to his or her regular occupation.[fn1] In applying such a clause, thecourt must look at the insured's occupation as a whole.[fn2] The insured's disability willbe considered total if it is such that he or she is unable to do "substantially" all the"material" acts which are usually required to be performed in the occupation orprofession or work in which he or she is engaged,[fn3] in a customary and usualmanner.[fn4] Thus, the "total disability" provisions were applicable to a physician whocontinued his office practice by examining patients, supervising office staff and makingpost-operative visits, but was unable to perform unassisted major head and neck cancersurgery, which previously constituted a major portion of his practice.[fn5]

Total disability does not mean a state of helplessness [fn6] or inability to do any partwhatever of the occupation, or to perform any work whatever for compensation, [fn7]and the fact that the insured performs, or is able to perform, some inconsequential, trivial,or incidental duties connected with his or her usual employment or occupation will notpreclude recovery. [fn8] On the other hand, the mere inability to perform one duty oroperation required in the particular occupation does not constitute total disability, [fn9]unless the insured obtained a modification of the policy entitling him to benefits if hecould not perform a specific aspect of his practice. [fn10]

Under an occupational disability policy defining total disability as "your inability toengage in your occupation," the term "your occupation" referred to specific work done byinsured at the time of injury, not to work requiring similar skills and producingcomparable income. [fn11] So, under such a provision, insured who, before suffering adisabling knee injury, had been working as a yacht salesman, was engaged in the activityor business of selling yachts, notwithstanding that he had worked at other sales jobsduring the life of the policy and had obtained employment as a freight-space salesman fora trucking company after he began receiving benefits under the policy. [fn12]

• Observation: An occupational disability clause may provide further that recoverymay be had only if the insured is not engaged in any other gainful occupation oremployment. [fn13]

[fn1] See, for example, Groff v. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co., 887 F. Supp. 1515 (S.D. Fla.1993), related reference, 887 F. Supp. 1519 (S.D. Fla. 1994), related reference, 85 F.3d642 (11th Cir. 1996) and related reference, 85 F.3d 643 (11th Cir. 1996).[fn2] Sun Life Ins. Co. of America v. Evans, 340 So. 2d 957 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 3d Dist.1976); Lorber v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 207 So. 2d 305 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 3d Dist. 1968).

Annotation References: What constitutes total disability within coverage of disabilityinsurance policy issued to lawyer, 6 A.L.R. 4th 422.• What constitutes permanent or total disability within coverage of insurance policy

issued to physical laborer or workman, 32 A.L.R. 3d 922.

6

• What constitutes total or permanent disability within the coverage of disabilityinsurance coverage issued to farmer or agricultural worker, 26 A.L.R. 3d 714.

• What constitutes permanent or total disability within coverage of disability insurancepolicy issued to one engaged in retail merchandising, 23 A.L.R. 3d 773.

• What constitutes total or permanent disability within the meaning of insurance policyissued to physician or dentist, 21 A.L.R. 3d 677.

[fn3] Groff v. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co., 887 F. Supp. 1515 (S.D. Fla. 1993), relatedreference, 887 F. Supp. 1519 (S.D. Fla. 1994), related reference, 85 F.3d 642 (11th Cir.1996) and related reference, 85 F.3d 643 (11th Cir. 1996); Franklin Life Ins. Co. v.Tharpe, 130 Fla. 546, 178 So. 300 (1938), reh'g denied, 131 Fla. 213, 179 So. 406 (1938);Grauer v. Occidental Life Ins. Co. of California, 363 So. 2d 583 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1stDist. 1978); Lorber v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 207 So. 2d 305 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 3d Dist.1968).

[fn4] Groff v. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co., 887 F. Supp. 1515 (S.D. Fla. 1993), relatedreference, 887 F. Supp. 1519 (S.D. Fla. 1994), related reference, 85 F.3d 642 (11th Cir.1996) and related reference, 85 F.3d 643 (11th Cir. 1996); Grauer v. Occidental Life Ins.Co. of California, 363 So. 2d 583 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1978); SLife Ins. Co. ofAmerica v. Evans, 340 So. 2d 957 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 3d Dist. 1976).

[fn5] Groff v. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co., 887 F. Supp. 1515 (S.D. Fla. 1993), relatedreference, 887 F. Supp. 1519 (S.D. Fla. 1994), related reference, 85 F.3d 642 (11th Cir.1996) and related reference, 85 F.3d 643 (11th Cir. 1996).[fn6] § 2195.[fn7] New England Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Huckins, 127 Fla. 540, 173 So. 696 (1937).[fn8] Lorber v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 207 So. 2d 305 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 3d Dist. 1968).[fn9] Danzig v. Reliance Standard Life Ins. Co., 668 F. Supp. 1551 (S.D. Fla. 1987)(postal worker).[fn10] Rosenberg v. Guardian Life fns. Co., 510 So. 2d 610, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1541 (Fla.Dist. Ct. App. 3d Dist. 1987) (ophthalmologist unable to perform surgery).[fn11] Berkshire Life Ins. Co. v. Adelberg, 698 So. 2d 828, 22 Fla. L. Weekly S513 (Fla.1997); Strama v. Union Fidelity Life Ins. Co., 793 So. 2d 1129, 26 Fla. L. Weekly D2210(Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1st Dist. 2001).[fn12] Berkshire Life Ins. Co. v. Adelberg, 698 So. 2d 828, 22 Fla. L. Weekly S513 (Fla.1997).[fn13] Grauer v. Occidental Life Ins. Co. of California, 363 So. 2d 583 (Fla. Dist. Ct.App. 1st Dist. 1978).Forms References: Defense that plaintiff earned money during period of allegeddisability. Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Insurance § 1032.

31 Fla. Jur. 2d § 2197 (2007), General Disability

A typical general disability clause requires that the insured be unable to perform thematerial or substantial duties of any occupation in which insured reasonably could [fn1]be expected to engage, or prevented from engaging in any occupation or performing any

7

work for compensation of financial value, [fn2] or from performing any work, followingany occupation, or engaging in any business for remuneration or profit, [fn3] or that theinsured suffer any impairment of mind or body that continuously renders it impossible forinsured to follow a gainful occupation.[fn4] Under such a clause, the insured is totallydisabled when his or her condition is such that he or she is not able to perform the dutiesof any occupation for which he or she is fitted or qualified by education, training, orexperience.[fn5] Thus, a travel and market consultant was not totally disabled from aninjury to his foot and back while running, even though the injuries allegedly restricted histravel and reduced his firm's income, where the consultant continued to perform theduties of employment as owner of the firm, continued to travel, and failed to show thathis business lost money due to his alleged disability, and the policy defined "totaldisability" as an inability to perform material and substantial duties of any occupationwhich insured reasonably could be expected to engage in.[fn6]

Generally, an insured who continues or resumes working subsequent to thecommencement of the disability is precluded from receiving total or permanent disabilitybenefits whenever he or she substantially performs the important and material duties ofhis or her occupation. [fn7] However this rule is subject to many important exceptions.Thus, recovery will not be precluded where the insured makes an unsuccessful attempt towork [fn8] or returns to a reduced or relaxed workload, or where he or she participates inmerely trivial or minor activities. [fn9] Thus, an elderly dentist did not terminate hisperiod of total disability because of his activities as a partner in a firm dealing inautomatic laundry equipment where the insured came to the office frequently when hefelt like it and performed a variety of odd jobs, but two business trips attempted by himhad terminated en route because of his physical condition, he signed many checks whileat home in bed, he drew no salary or other compensation, and had no specific duties toperform. [fn10]

Even though a person who becomes wholly disabled from engaging in his or heroccupation may nevertheless follow some gainful occupation after years of preparatorystudy and mental training, until that end is accomplished and the insured is receivingprofits or remuneration from his or her new vocation, the insurer is not justified inrefusing monthly benefit payments. [fn11]

[fn1] McCluney v. General American Life Ins. Co., 1 F. Supp. 2d 1347 (M.D. Fla. 1998),aff'd, 162 F.3d 1178 (11th Cir. 1998).[fn2] See, for example, Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of the U.S. v. Neill, 243 F.2d 193 (5thCir. 1957).[fn3] See, for example, New York Life Ins. Co. v. Bird, 152 Fla. 532, 12 So. 2d 454 (1943).[fn4] See, for example, Mutual Life Ins. Co. of New York v. Knight, 130 Fla. 733, 178So. 898 (1937).[fn5] Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of the U.S. v. Neill, 243 F.2d 193 (5th Cir. 1957);McCluney V. General American Life Ins. Co., 1 F. Supp. 2d 1347 (M.D. Fla. 1998),aff'd, 162 F.3d 1178 (11th Cir. 1998); New York Life Ins. Co. v. Bird, 152 Fla. 532, 12So. 2d 454 (1943); Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of U.S. v. McKeithan, 119 Fla. 486, 160So. 883 (1935).

8

Annotation References: What constitutes total disability within coverage of disabilityinsurance policy issued to lawyer, 6 A.L.R. 4th 422.• What constitutes permanent or total disability within coverage of insurance policy

issued to physical laborer or workman, 32 A.L.R. 3d 922.• What constitutes total or permanent disability within the coverage of disability

insurance coverage issued to farmer or agricultural worker, 26 A.L.R. 3d 714.• What constitutes permanent or total disability within coverage of disability insurance

policy issued to one engaged in retail merchandising, 23 A.L.R. 3d 773.• What constitutes total or permanent disability within the meaning of insurance policy

issued to physician or dentist, 21 A.L.R. 3d 677• Insurance: "total disability" or the like as referring to inability to work in usual

occupation or in other occupations, 21 A.L.R. 3d 1155.Trial Strategy References: Unemployability as total disability. Unemployability OfInsured Under Disability Policy, 18 Am. Jur. Proof of Facts 2d 407.

[fn6] McCluney v. General American Life Ins. Co., 1 F. Suppa 2d 1347 (M.D. Fla. 1998),aff'd, 162 F.3d 1178 (11th Cir. 1998).[fn7] See Am. Jur. 2d, Insurance § 1479.

Annotation References: Continuance or resumption of work as affecting finding of totalor permanent disability within insurance coverage, 24 A.L.R. 3d 8.

[fn8] INA Life Ins. Co. of New York v. Davis, 404 So. 2d 397 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 5thDist. 1981)[fn9] Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of the U.S. v. Neill, 243 F.2d 193 (5th Cir. 1957), statingthat the insured is not required to remain completely idle by confining his activities to hishome or the recreational pursuits of elderly retired persons.[fn10] Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of the U.S. v. Neill, 243 F.2d 193 (5th Cir. 1957).[fn11] New York Life Ins. Co. v. Leeks, 122 Fla. 127, 165 So. 50 (1935).

31 Fla. Jur. 2d § 2198 (2007), Specific injuries, loss, or afflictions as total disability

Generally, when the term "total disability" is used in a contract of insurance without anylimitation whatever, either as to the duration of the disability or as to the cause fromwhich it should arise, it may refer to temporary or permanent total disability arising fromvarious causes, including mental incapacity (which mayor may not render the insuredwholly or totally disabled) or disease, [fn1] or physical sickness or disorder [fn2] such asarthritis or diabetes, [fn3] loss or impairment of vision [fn4] or hearing, [fn5] or acirculatory disorders such as clotting of veins in the legs, diminished blood supply in thelower extremities, phlebitis with production of emboli, and blood clots, with danger ofocclusions in the heart, lungs, or extremities. [fn6]

[fn1] Clarkson v. New York Life Ins. Co., 4 F. Supp. 791 (S.D. Fla. 1933).

9

Annotation References: Mental incapacity or disease as constituting total or permanentdisability within insurance coverage, 22 A.L.R. 3d 1000.

[fn2] Annotation References: Back injury or condition as constituting total or permanentdisability within insurance coverage, 23 A.L.R. 3d 1108.[fn3] Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co. of Cal. v. McCaskill, 126 Fla. 82, 170 So. 579 (1936).[fn4] New York Life Ins. Co. v. Bird, 152 Fla. 532, 12 So. 2d 454 (1943) (insured whosuffered from cataracts in both eyes was totally disabled even though he was able to usehis vision to walk and to recognize members of his family and friends, and to look at theheadlines in the newspaper and to use a typewriter for a few minutes).[fn5] Am. Jur. 2d, Insurance § 1483[fn6] Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of the U.S. v. Neill, 243 F.2d 193 (5th Cir. 1957).

Annotation References: Heart or vascular condition as constituting total or permanentdisability within insurance coverage, 21 A.L.R. 3d 1383.

31 Fla. Jur. 2d § 2199 (2007), Continuity and permanence

A policy may include the element of continuity, and undertake to insure only for lossresulting from bodily injuries that wholly and "continuously" disable the insured. In thiscontext, the word "continuously" means regularly, protracted, enduring, and without anysubstantial interruption of sequence. [fn1] Where the policy language is unambiguous, afinding that there was a period following an employee's injury during which he was notdisabled precludes recovery under a policy requiring continuity of injury. [fn2]

Where a policy provides for the payment of the compensation for permanent disability,and then stipulates that such payments will be made only during the continuance of thedisability, the insured is entitled to recover if the nature of the injury renders it reasonableto suppose that he will be permanently disabled. [fn3] If it turns out that, contrary toexpectation, the disablement was not permanent, then payments cease. [fn4]

Under a policy requiring that total disability must have existed continuously for at least aspecified period, the presumption of permanency attaches to a proved total disability afterit has existed continuously for such time, [fn5] even if the cause of the disability is nolonger the same as what it was when first incurred. [fn6] But if the insured is totallydisabled for a time but not totally disabled within the policy definition following thelapse of the prescribed period, his recovery is limited to whatever the contracts providesfor in the case of temporary total disability. [fn7]

[fn1] Am. Jur. 2d, Insurance § 1487.[fn2] Skinner v. Continental Cas. Co., 268 So. 2d 576 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2d Dist. 1972).[fn3] Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of U.S. v. Wiggins, 115 Fla. 136, 155 So. 327 (1934);Cassens v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 114 Fla. 659, 154 So. 522 (1934).

10

Where total disability was not of such nature as to indicate or suggest that it was orwould be permanent, insured was not entitled to recover. Berry v. Fidelity & Cas. Co. ofNew York, 163 So. 2d 339 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 3d Dist. 1964).

Forms References: Answer-Defense that plaintiff is no longer totally disabled. Am. Jur.Pleading and Practice Forms, Insurance § 1031.

[fn4] Cassens v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 114 Fla. 659, 154 So. 522 (1934).[fn5] Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of U.S. v. McKeithan, 119 Fla. 486 160 So. 883 (1935).[fn6] Mutual Life Ins. Co. of New York v. Knight, 130 Fla. 733, 178 So. 898 (1937).[fn7] Suggs v. Occidental Life Ins. Co. of N. C., 256 So. 2d 243 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 3dDist. 1972) (insured received indemnity for designated 24-month period).

Cumulative Supplement to Volume 312007 Supplement (Pocket Part)Issued in February 2007

§ 2195 Generally; what constitutes "total disability"cases

Under Florida law, letter from disability insurer's chief underwriting officer to insuredphysician clarifying, at insured's request, that insured's "regular occupation" was invasiveand interventional cardiology, not cardiology as insurer originally had stated, wasbargained-for modification of total disability insurance policy, and thus was controlling,for for purposes of policy's definition of disability as "[inability] . . . to engage in[insured's] regular occupation or profession." Kraft v. Massachusetts Cas. Ins. Co., 320 F.Supp. 2d 1234 (N.D. Fla. 2004).

§ 2196 Occupational disabilitycases

Insured under a disability insurance policy was regularly engaged in an occupation at thetime of his disability and, thus, could fit the policy's definition of total disability, eventhough insured was not actively employed at time of his disability, and had not worked inover 18 months due to the injury; policy language did not require insured to be activelyemployed. McPhee v. The Paul Revere Life Ins. Co., 883 So. 2d 364 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App.4th Dist. 2004).

31 Fla. Jur. 2d § 2191, Duty of insured to remove disability

An insured who is suffering from a disability is under a duty to avail himself or herself ofall reasonable means and remedies to remove such disability. [fn1] Thus, an osteopathwith a skin condition on his hands, diagnosed as infectious eczematoid dermatitis, wasdenied benefits for total disability where he made no effort to have his condition treatedby a dermatologist until after filing his claim of disability, which was several years afterthe onset of the condition, having previously prescribed and administered his own

11

treatment, which consisted mostly of trying out free samples sent to him bypharmaceutical companies; and where there was no evidence that with a proper diagnosisand regimen the condition would not yield to treatment. [fn2]

If, however, there is a difference of opinion among doctors about the cause of thedisability, benefits may not be withheld because of the party's failure to follow themedical advice of the insurer's doctor. [fn3]

[fn1] Mutual Life Ins. Co. of N. Y. v. Ellison, 223 F.2d 686 (5th Cir. 1955); Mutual LifeIns. Co. of New York v. Knight, 130 Fla. 733, 178 So. 898 (1937).[fn2] Mutual Life Ins. Co. of N. Y. v. Ellison, 223 F.2d 686 (5th Cir. 1955)[fn3] Mutual Life Ins. Co. of New York v. Knight, 130 Fla. 733, 178 So. 898 (1937).

9. Appendix 28, Audio Files (.wav) on CD-ROM 14.

Today I am providing the .wav audio files shown below to the Clerk on a CD-ROM

delivered by United Parcel Service (UPS). I will email the .wav files to parties with working

email, as part of the ordinary service of court documents.

Audio file (.wav) of telephonic hearing before Judge Stancil December 18, 2014,Case 2013-CA-000115, Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. v. Neil J. Gillespie et al.Judge Stancil called me at home December 18, 2014 at 10:13 AM and consented[fn1] to the recording [fn2].

Audio file (.wav) of the March 19, 2015 telephone call of Grace A. Fagan,General Counsel, Fifth Judicial Circuit Florida. Ms. Fagan called me at homeMarch 19, 2015 at 1:54 PM and consented [fn1] to the recording. [fn2]

Email December 30, 2014 from Daniel Hendrix (Support Specialist, CiviTek),

Audio or video files need to be copied to a CD or flash drive and delivered to theclerk's office. You will need to contact your local clerk's office to get specifics onproper labling, whether they prefer you to mail or hand deliver, etc... If you haveany further questions please contact support@myflcourtaccess.com for assistance.

10. Appendix 21, AmeriFace refused to provide name of counsel that might represent me,

AmeriFace is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public charity (#32-0085490). It was founded in 1991 to

provide educational and emotional support to persons born with craniofacial anomalies and their

families. Debbie Oliver is the Executive Director, and claims AmeriFace is a “premier support

organization” but refused to provide to me and the name of an attorney who might assist me.

12

On March 13, 2015 at 12.00 PM Ms. Oliver posted on Facebook about being contacted by

attorneys, "For more than five years, our organization has been contacted by attorneys...”

On March 13, 2015 at 12:19 PM Ms. Oliver posted on Facebook,

“...the inquiry this morning came from a law firm run by an attorney ****who sitson the board of directors of a so-called cleft support organization!!**** Are you kiddingme? This is NOT right. I am just about beside myself right now...this is a law firm weturned down years ago, one that found an opening somewhere else in the cleft community- and now that person is on the legal website endorsing the attorney, saying he has been"fundamentally helpful in the growth of our organization." Folks, when you need support,stick with the premier support organization for the cleft/craniofacial community! Inviteyour friends and acquaintances to join us at...where there is no underlying agenda!

Unfortunately, there is an “underlying agenda” with AmeriFace that results in discrimination

against a protected class of adult persons with craniofacial anomaly-related disabilities.

Unfortunately parents of the afflicted are some of the worst offenders. The problem iscompounded exponentially when they are in positions of authority in AmeriFace andother groups purporting to serve the “cleft/craniofacial community”.

In fact they only serve the parent agenda within the “cleft/craniofacial community”.

Attached is a paper published by the Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, July 2011, Vol. 48No. 4, “Impact of a Cleft Lip and/or Palate on Maternal Stress and AttachmentRepresentations” that explains the parent phenomenon to some extent. Also attached isan abstract of the paper.

There are two separate cleft/craniofacial communities. AmeriFace and Cleft Advocate is acommunity of parents of children born with facial birth defects. There is some crossoverwith parents of children who acquire facial disfigurement through illness or accidents.Parent groups may minimize the consequence of facial birth defects as an ego defense,and as a coping mechanism regarding their children with facial disfigurement.

Adult survivors of facial birth defects are a reminder to some parents of the limitations ofcraniofacial surgery to create normalcy from what is missing or deformed. Bigotry andprejudice of certain parents toward afflicted adults may fall along the same lines as racialhatred, and discrimination based on social class, ethnicity, religion, disability and sexualorientation.

13

11. Appendix 22, Citibank, N.A. Best Buy Account; Amazon.com, Synchrony Bank

For some reason Citibank, N.A. and Synchrony Bank did not properly credit payments I timely

made to credit card accounts with Best Buy and Amazon.com. It has taken an enormous amount

of time to rectify this situation, which I have done. The accounts are now closed with no balance.

12. Appendix 24, SCOTUS No. 13-7280 159p.

SCOTUS No. 13-7280 was compromised as shown on the Justice Network blog. There is

too much to separately show here. Information appears on the Justice Network,

• See, “No response from Chief Justice John Roberts; corrupted Supreme Court Petitions No.

12-7747 and No. 13-7280, posted Sunday, August 17, 2014.

http://nosueorg.blogspot.com/2014/08/no-response-from-chief-justice-john.html

• Also see, “Mississippi Goddam (Florida Goddam)” posted Saturday, September 13, 2014

http://nosueorg.blogspot.com/2014/09/mississippi-goddam-florida-goddam.html

• Also see, “Please support SCOTUS Petition for Rehearing 13-7280; Stop a wrongful HECM

foreclosure of my home”, posted Monday January 6, 2014.

http://nosueorg.blogspot.com/2014/01/please-support-scotus-petition-for.html

• Also see, “Complaint against McCalla Raymer lawyer Danielle Nicole Parsons sent to

grievance committee”, Posted Sunday, August 10, 2014.

http://nosueorg.blogspot.com/2014/08/complaint-against-mccalla-raymer-lawyer.html

• Also see, “Defendants’ Rule 1.150 Motion To Strike Sham Pleadings”, August 6, 2014.

http://nosueorg.blogspot.com/2014/08/defendants-rule-1150-motion-to-strike.html

See Appendix Volume No. 19 (Rule 9.220, Fla. R. App. P.), The Florida Bar (all dismissed)• Complaint against Danielle Nicole Parsons, TFB File No. 2014-30,525 (9A).• Complaint against Curtis Alan Wilson; RFA No. 15-13443• Unlicensed Practice of Law Investigation of Yolanda I. Martinez, 20143031(9A)

14

13. The U.S. Eleventh Circuit failed to honor its Order entered in 13-11585-B July 25, 2013,

before HULL, WILSON and JORDAN, Circuit Judges. BY THE COURT: (Exhibit 10).

“...Should Gillespie wish to petition for mandamus relief, he may file a separate petitionfor a writ of mandamus or prohibition with this Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1651,Fed.R.App.P.21.”

My letter January 12, 2015 to The Honorable Ed Carnes, Chief Judge began, “This letter

concerns an Order June 25, 2013 authorizing me to file a petition under 28 USC 1651, the all writs

act, in Case 13-11585-B, Reverse Mortgage Solutions v Neil J. Gillespie et al.” (Exhibit 11)

Former Clerk John Ley responded by letter dated January 20, 2015. (Exhibit 12).

Appeal Number: 13-11585-BCase Style: Reverse Mortgage Solutions, In v. Neil Gillespie, et alDistrict Court Docket No: 5:13-cv-00058-WTH-PRL

I am returning to you unfiled the papers which you have submitted.In the absence of a pending appeal, as required by Rule 4 of the Federal Rules ofAppellate Procedure, this court has no jurisdiction to grant the relief requested.This appeal was dismissed on 6/12/2013, and reconsideration on 7/25/2013.No further action will be taken.

Former Clerk Ley is mistaken. The all writs act (28 USC § 1651) is proper here, and

serves to negate the excuses Ley cited. Those reasons existed on June 25, 2013, which is why the

Court’s Order July 25, 2013 authorized me to file a petition under 28 USC 1651 (all writs act) in

Case 13-11585-B, Reverse Mortgage Solutions v Neil J. Gillespie et al.

WHEREFORE, I responded to the Clerk’s email, Notice of New Requirement When

Filing Notice of Appeal. Later today I plan to file a motion for rehearing and clarification, in

PETITION NO. 5D15-0341.

PETITIONER’S RULE 9.330 MOTION FORREHEARING;CLARIFICATION;CERTIFICATION

Of this Court’s Order entered April 6, 2015 that deniedPetitioner’s Motion to Reinstate, filed March 18, 2015

15

Later today I also plan to file a motion to enlarge time in APPEAL NO. 5D15-0340.

I respectfully move the Court to grant such other and further relief as it deems just and

equitable, including an order reinstating PETITION NO. 5D15-0341, and enlarging time to file

the initial brief in APPEAL NO. 5D15-0340.

In the alternative, I move for appointment of counsel under the Americans With

Disabilities Act (ADA) as amended, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, and hereby

give notice of appeal of the order dismissing the petition to the Supreme Court of Florida.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED April 27, 2015.

Neil J. Gillespie, Petitioner pro se8092 SW 115th LoopOcala, Florida 34481Telephone: (352) 854-7807Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net

Appendices enclosed, Rule 9.220, Fla. R. App. P.

Appendix Volume No. 11, Constitutional Access to Courts 113pAppendix Volume No. 13, Judge Stancil’s Driver’s License Competence Test-Title II ADA 49pAppendix Volume No. 15, 31 FlaJur2d Insurance-Disability 11pAppendix Volume No. 21, AmeriFace refused to provide name of counsel 63pAppendix Volume No. 22, Citibank NA Best Buy 109pAppendix Volume No. 24, SCOTUS Petition No. 13-7280 159pAppendix Volume No. 19 The Florida Bar, 91p

Certificate of Service - April 27, 2015Fifth District Court of Appeal, Florida

PETITIONER-APPELLANT RESPONSEAppeal No. 5D15-0340; and Petition No. 5D15-0341

I certify that today April 27, 2015, the foregoing PETITIONER-APPELLANT RESPONSE wasE-filed in the Fifth District Court of Appeal, and furnished to the names below by E-mail, exceptfor The Honorable Hale Ralph Stancil, his email is blocked, and was served by UPS instead.Appendix Vol. 28, Audio Files on CD-ROM, was provided to the Clerk on CD-ROM via UPS.

The Honorable Hale Ralph Stancil Mr. Curtis Alan Wilson, FL Bar No. 77669Florida Circuit Court Judge Ms. Danielle Nicole Parsons, FL Bar No. 29364Marion County Judicial Center McCalla Raymer, LLC110 N.W. 1st Avenue, Ocala, FL 34475 225 E. Robinson Street, Ste. 660Blocked email: hstancil@circuit5.org Orlando, FL 32801VIA UPS No. 1Z64589F0395066465 Email: MRService@mccallaraymer.com

The Honorable Joanne P. Simmons The Honorable David R. EllspermannClerk of Court, Clerk’s Office Marion County Clerk of Court & ComptrollerFifth District Court of Appeal 110 N.W. 1st Avenue, Ocala, FL 34475300 South Beach Street Email: Ellspermann@marioncountyclerk.orgDaytona Beach, FL 32114 Mr. Gregory C. Harrell, General CounselEmail: simmonsj@flcourts.org Email: GHarrell@marioncountyclerk.orgVIA UPS No. 1Z64589FP297794492

Ms. Colleen Murphy Davis, AUSA Ms. Michalene Y. Rowells, Paralegal Specialist400 N. Tampa Street, Suite 3200 U.S. Department of HUDTampa, FL 33602 909 SE 1st Ave., Suite 500USAFLM.State.Foreclosures@usdoj.gov Miami, FL 33131USAFLM.HUD.Disclaimers@usdoj.gov Tel. 305-520-5104; Fax: 305-536-5129Email: Michalene.Y.Rowells@hud.gov Email: Michalene.Y.Rowells@hud.gov

Marion County Florida Sheriff Chris Blair, Marion CountyBoard of County Commissioners (BOCC) Email: cblair@marionso.comComm. Stan McClain, Chairman, District 3 Marion County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO)Comm. Kathy Bryant, Vice Chair, Dist. 2 692 NW 30th Ave., Ocala, FL 34475Comm. Carl Zalak, III, District 4 Tel. (352)732-8181, http://marionso.com/Comm. David Moore, District 1 ATTN: Lt. Bill Sowder, Civil DivisionComm. Earl Arnett, District 5 Bailiff and Civil Process ServicesBill Kauffman, Interim Co. Administrator Email: bsowder@marionso.comMatthew Guy Minter, County Attorney VIA UPS No. 1Z64589FP296426471Email: matthew.minter@marioncountyfl.org UPS initial courtesy service to MCSO

Oak Run Homeowners Association, Inc. Development & Construction Corporation of America,c/o ORHA Board of Directors c/o Carol Olson, Vice President of Administration,7480 SW Highway 200 and Secretary-Treasurer, for RA Priya GhummanOcala, FL 34476 10983 SW 89 Avenue, Ocala, FL 34481Email: orhaboard@yahoo.com Email: colson@deccahomes.com

Certificate of Service, April 27, 2015 (5thDCA)PETITIONER-APPELLANT RESPONSE - Appeal No. 5D15-0341; and Petition No. 5D15-0341

2

Neil J. Gillespie and Mark Gillespie as Unknown Settlers/Beneficiaries OfCo-Trustees Of The Gillespie Family The Gillespie Family Living TrustLiving Trust Agreement Dated Agreement Dated February 10, 1997February 10, 1997 (The Trust was Terminated February 2, 2015)(The Trust was Terminated Feb-02-2015) c/o Neil J. Gillespie(Mark Gillespie resigned as co-trustee) 8092 SW 115th Loop8092 SW 115th Loop, Ocala, FL 34481 Ocala, Florida 34481Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net

Mark Gillespie Unknown Trustees, Settlers And Beneficiaries7504 Summer Meadows Drive Of Unknown Settlers/Beneficiaries Of TheFt. Worth, TX 76123 Gillespie Family Living Trust AgreementEmail: mark.gillespie@att.net Dated February 10, 1997.

(The Trust was Terminated February 2, 2015)Neil J. Gillespie c/o Neil J. Gillespie8092 SW 115th Loop 8092 SW 115th LoopOcala, FL 34481 Ocala, Florida 34481Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net

Unknown spouse of Mark Gillespie Unknown spouse of Elizabeth Bauerlen/k/a Joetta Gillespie 6356 SW 106th Placec/o Mark Gillespie Ocala, FL 344767504 Summer Meadows Drive c/o Mark GillespieFt. Worth, TX 76123 Email: mark.gillespie@att.netEmail: mark.gillespie@att.net

Elizabeth Bauerle Unknown Tenant in Possession 1 andn/k/a Elizabeth Bidwood Unknown Tenant in Possession 2c/o Mark Gillespie c/o Neil J. GillespieEmail: mark.gillespie@att.net Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED April 27, 2015.

NEIL J. GILLESPIE, individually, and as former The Gillespie Family Living TrustTrustee, as provided by F.S. Ch. 736 Part III, Agreement Dated February 10, 1997of the Terminated Gillespie Family Living Trust Was Terminated February 2, 2015.Agreement Dated February 10, 1997. A Certified Copy Of The Recorded8092 SW 115th Loop Instrument Terminating The TrustOcala, Florida 34481 Is Attached Hereto As Recorded ByPhone: 352-854-7807 The Marion County Clerk & ComptrollerEmail: neilgillespie@mfi.net Book6161/Page1844, CFN#2015009748

Termination of the Gillespie Family Living Trust Agreement Dated February 10, 1997

1111111111111111111111111111111111111111STATE OF FLORIDA ) 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 SAYETH 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.

Notary Public State of Florida(SEAL) Angelica Cruz My Commission EE067986 Expires 02127/2015

~(?JI(s2. Lr0L

r

NOTAR UBLIC

Print Na of Notary PublIc

My Commission Expires: --2J......;;J;_~-=- _.._'_)5

2

Book6161/Page1845 CFN#2015009748 Page 2 of 2

Index of Exhibits

APPEAL NO. 5D15-0340, and PETITION NO. 5D15-0341

PETITIONER/APPELLANT RESPONSE TONotice of New Requirement When Filing Notice of Appeal

Exhibit 1 Email Clerk re Notice of New Requirement Rule 9.020(i)(3)

Exhibit 2 Email Gillespie April 8, 2015 to the Clerk, et al, re reinstate petition

Exhibit 3 Florida Bar Rule 4-1.1 Competence

Exhibit 4 Florida Bar Rule 4-1.3 Diligence

Exhibit 5 Social Security letter to Gillespie, you met the medical requirements for disability

Exhibit 6 Publix Pharmacy cost of Lantus Solostar insulin $422.95

Exhibit 7 CT Cervical Spine for Gillespie, March 16, 2015

Exhibit 8 One Page Glucose Summary Report Apr-07-15 through Apr-20-15 for Gillespie

Exhibit 9 Prescription insulin isophane (NPH)100 units, cost $122.95 (3 page composite)

Exhibit 10 C.A.11 Order in 13-11585-B, July 25, 2013, Gillespie may file under all writs act

Exhibit 11 Gillespie letter to The Honorable Ed Carnes, Chief Judge, January 12, 2015

Exhibit 12 Clerk (former) John Ley letter January 20, 2015, denied all writs act (16 USC 1651)

Neil Gillespie

From: <eFile5DCA@FLCourts.org>To: <eFile5DCA@FLCourts.org>Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 4:36 PMSubject: Notice of New Requirement When Filing Notice of Appeal

Page 1 of 1

4/27/2015

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL, FIFTH DISTRICT STATE OF FLORIDA NOTICE Informing the Appellate Court of Pending Motions Postponing Rendition at time of Filing the Notice of Appeal April 10, 2015 Effective January 1, 2015, Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.020(i)(3) has been amended to eliminate the abandonment of motions authorized pursuant to rule 9.020(l) by the filing of a notice of appeal. Rendition of a final order will be delayed by the filing or service of a timely and authorized motion and the filing of a notice of appeal will not result in the abandonment of such a motion but rather the appeal shall be held in abeyance until the filing of a signed, written order disposing of the motion. Attorneys and parties filing a notice of appeal should immediately inform the court by the filing of a proper notice if a motion postponing rendition is pending so that the case may properly be held in abeyance. Likewise, the attorneys or parties in the case should inform the court by notice upon the lower tribunal disposition of such motions by filing a copy of the lower tribunal’s signed, written order disposing of the motion. Lower court clerks, lower tribunal clerks, and agency clerks are now required to complete a new section of the electronic transmittal form submitted when efiling notices of appeal to this court which must indicate whether or not a motion postponing rendition is pending in the case below. Clerks must mark this section of the form or the notice of appeal may be rejected until such time as the transmittal form is properly completed. /s/ ____________________________ Joanne P. Simmons, Clerk of Court Fifth District Court of Appeal State of Florida

1

Neil Gillespie

From: "Neil Gillespie" <neilgillespie@mfi.net>To: "Minter, Matthew" <Matthew.Minter@marioncountyfl.org>; "Joanne P. Simmons"

<simmonsj@flcourts.org>; "John Anthony Tomasino" <tomasino@flcourts.org>; "Lee Bentley USAFLM" <Lee.Bentley@usdoj.gov>; "David Ellspermann" <Ellspermann@marioncountyclerk.org>; "Greg Harrell" <GHarrell@marioncountyclerk.org>; "Hon. Hale R Stancil" <hstancil@circuit5.org>; "McCalla Raymer E-service" <MRService@mccallaraymer.com>; <USAFLM.State.Foreclosures@usdoj.gov>; "Michalene Rowells" <Michalene.Y.Rowells@hud.gov>; "USAFLM.HUD.Disclaimers" <USAFLM.HUD.Disclaimers@usdoj.gov>; "Oak Run Homeowners Association, Inc." <orhaboard@yahoo.com>; "Carol Olson" <colson@deccahomes.com>; "Mark Gillespie" <mark.gillespie@att.net>; "Neil Gillespie" <neilgillespie@mfi.net>

Cc: "Hernandez, Barbra" <Barbra.Hernandez@marioncountyfl.org>; "Doty, Danielle" <Danielle.Doty@marioncountyfl.org>; "Mitchell, Yvonne" <Yvonne.Mitchell@marioncountyfl.org>

Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2015 3:04 PMAttach: UN Resolution 64-292, the human right to safe drinking water and sanitation.pdf; 29.007 Court-

appointed counsel (2014).pdf; 2010, 07-07-10, Marion Co Hires Minter as county attorney.pdf; 2014, 06-18-14, Letter of Guy Minter to NJG.pdf; 2015, 03-16-15, CT Cervical Spine NJG.pdf; 2015, 03-19-15, Publix Pharmacy $467.12..pdf; 2015, 03-30-15, email Craig Waters, Director, Public Information Office.pdf; 2015, 04-01-15, ORDER SC14-1637 petition dismissed 2p.pdf; 2015, 04-06-15, Order DENIED reinstate petition.pdf; Appendix 11 ABA Civil Right to Counsel 71p.pdf; Appendix 13, Judge Stancil's Driver's License Competence Test for Title II ADA 46p.pdf; Petitioner's Motion to Reinstate Dismissed Petition for Writ of Prohibition 10p.pdf; Records Request, Rule 2.420(m)(1), DOJ letter to CJ Labarga.pdf; UN Disconnecting water from people who cannot pay - an affront to human rights.pdf

Subject: Re: Amended Petition for Writ of Prohibition Case No. 5D15-0341; Sec. 19-179(1) POLICY DISPUTE - Marion County Utilities (MCU)

Page 1 of 7

4/27/2015

Clerk of the Supreme Court John Anthony TomasinoClerk of Court Joanne P. Simmons Fifth District Court of Appeal, Florida Amended Petition for Writ of Prohibition Case No. 5D15-0341 Guy Minter, Marion County Attorney

RE: Amended Petition for Writ of Prohibition Case No. 5D15-0341 Appendix 13, Judge Stancil’s Driver’s License Competence Test for Title II ADA Appendix 11, AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION - Directory of Law Governing Appointment of Counsel in FLORIDA Civil Proceedings Florida Supreme Court’s dismissed of petition SC14-1637 Response to Mr. Minter

Dear Mr. Tomasino, Mr. Minter and Clerk Simmons:

Mr. Minter, this is to acknowledge your email about public records below. I am unable to respond further until I finish my Amended Petition for Writ of Prohibition Case No. 5D15-0341. As you know, you and Judge Stancil invoked the same wrong Driver’s License Competence Test for Title II ADA, which I attribute to the corrupting influence of David R. Ellspermann, Marion County Clerk of Court & Comptroller.

My motion to reinstate the petition (attached) was denied April 6, 2015 (attached) without response to my request for appointment of counsel under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) as amended, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, or response to notice of appeal of the order dismissing the petition to the Supreme Court of Florida.

I am still working on the petition, it is taking longer than planned due to disability, and the amount of work involved, such as twenty or so appendices. Please find attached Appendix Volume No. 13 to refute

2

the same wrong Driver’s License Competence Test for Title II ADA advanced by you and Judge Stancil.

Appendix Volume No. 13 (Rule 9.220), Amended Petition For Writ of Prohibition RE: Judge Stancil’s Driver’s License Competence Test for Title II ADA

Appendix Volume No. 14 (Rule 9.220), Amended Petition For Writ of Prohibition, will show significant loss of brain function following traumatic brain injury in 1988, shown by the results a WRAT-R2 test (Wide Range Achievement Test-R2), part of my vocational screening by the Florida Division of Vocational Rehabilitation in 1993/1994.

My health continues to decline. Due to indigence I was not able to purchase a prescription costing $422.95 for Lantus Solostar insulin (100 units) see attached. On Monday April 6, 2015 my doctor interpreted the results of the attached CT scan of me from March 16, 2015: C5-6, moderate to severe left neural foramina stenosis due to uncovertebral joint hypertrophy. This condition may explain neuropathy in both my hands that makes typing difficult and painful.

Mr. Minter, I believe your incentive-based salary puts you in conflict with the citizens of Marion County, as you strive to meet "certain performance benchmarks" instead of providing public service. The Ocala Star Banner reported July 7, 2010, "Marion hires Seminole County's Minter as county attorney". (attached)

"If Minter meets certain performance benchmarks to be set by the commission, his salary would rise to $180,000 in the second year." http://www.ocala.com/article/20100707/ARTICLES/100709777

This conflict likely explains why you failed to respond to my policy dispute submitted May 1, 2014 for six weeks. Ultimately MCU returned my deposit in the amount of $150, which negates your position. The county still owes me return of the $55 transfer fee wrongly charged.

I requested and was denied disability accommodation for access to information ultimately found here: https://www.municode.com/library/fl/marion_county/codes/code_of_ordinances

The above link is to the Municode library for the Marion County Florida Code of Ordinances. This is about getting information that Marion County did not want to provide. The above link does not appear on the Marion County Utilities website that I know of. The utility application is not online. To make an informed decision, I need to obtain and review this information in advance and in quiet, without a MCU employee lying to me and presenting false choices, and demanding a decision prior to leaving its dilapidated office, which I understand has moved.

Your claim that F.S. § § 282.601 - 282.606 does not apply to local governments is negated by MCU’s duty under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act which is a similar law, and one Marion County is obligated to obey as a recipient of federal funds. MCU could resolve this by,

A. Placing access to its utilities application online. B. Providing a link to the Municode library for the Marion County Florida Code of Ordinances https://www.municode.com/library/fl/marion_county/codes/code_of_ordinances The Municode library is a usable form of the Code. The PDF version offered by the County is far less accessable, or not accessable in some cases of disability.

This is not a question about being "an ambulatory individual with a driver's license, able to speak, hear,

Page 2 of 7

4/27/2015

read and write". This is not a question of being "physically capable of accessing the offices of Marion County Utilities". That is compete and utter nonsense. Marion County Utility overcharged me by $205. That shows without accommodation, Marion County defrauded me.

MCU employees misrepresented to me the requirements of Sec. 19-181, customer deposits, when I appeared in person at the MCU office, on Tuesday, April 29, 2014.

1. MCU employees wrongly portrayed that a certain sequence applied to the establishment of credit under Sec. 19-181(a). Specifically, MCU insisted that if a credit review under (a)(5) was denied, that denial foreclosed all other options except (a)(2), the applicant pays a cash deposit. MCU lied, because option (a)(4) was available to me to establish credit under 19-181(a). However I was unaware that MCU was lying to me because I did not have access to the Code in a usable form.

2. MCU employees wrongly portrayed that under (a)(4), the account "must be in your name". Again, MCU lied, and I was unaware that MCU was lying because I did not have access to a usable form of Code. An applicant need only provide a letter from another public utility stating the applicant has two (2) years of good account history as defined by (a)(4).

Mr. Minter, you wrote June 18, 2014 that Marion County Utilities does not have provisions for "economic hardship", but you would be pleased to review any such provisions. On July 28, 2010 the United Nations General Assembly explicitly recognized, through Resolution 64/292, the human right to safe drinking water and sanitation, and acknowledged that clean drinking water and sanitation are essential to the realisation of all human rights. The United States is a member of the UN and subject to Resolution 64/292. Under Resolution 64/292, everyone in Florida has a human right to water and sanitation. (attached, and at the link) http://www.un.org/es/comun/docs/?symbol=A/RES/64/292&lang=E

See the attached UN press release, also at the link http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=14777&LangID=E

"GENEVA (25 June 2014) – Three UN experts* on the human rights to water and sanitation, adequate housing, and extreme poverty and human rights expressed concern Wednesday about reports of widespread water disconnections in the US city of Detroit of households unable to pay water bills. "Disconnection of water services because of failure to pay due to lack of means constitutes a violation of the human right to water and other international human rights," the experts said. "Disconnections due to non-payment are only permissible if it can be shown that the resident is able to pay but is not paying. In other words, when there is genuine inability to pay, human rights simply forbids disconnections," said Catarina de Albuquerque, the expert on the human right to water and sanitation."

The foregoing is only a fraction of my ultimate final response to your letter of June 18, 2014 (attached), a response which may exceed 100 pages with supporting documents.

To the Court(s) and Clerk(s), the Florida legislature enacted Fla. Stat. § 29.007 Court-appointed counsel, see attached Appendix 11, AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION - Directory of Law Governing Appointment of Counsel in FLORIDA Civil Proceedings

Fla. Stat. § 29.007 Court-appointed counsel, "Subsections (3), (4), (5), (6), and (7) ... This section applies in any situation in which the court appoints counsel to protect a litigant’s due process rights." A plain reading of "any situation" includes HECM reverse home mortgage foreclosure in either the trial court or appellate court, and ultimately the supreme court.

Page 3 of 7

4/27/2015

Mr. Tomasino, I am in receipt of the Florida Supreme Court’s dismissed of petition SC14-1637, see attached. Craig Waters denied a records request for the DOJ record notifying Chief Justice Jorge Labarga that it is investigating the mental-health screening imposed by the Florida Supreme Court on bar applicants. The Supreme Court wrongly denied a counsel appointment in SC14-1637 required under Fla. Stat. § 29.007 Court-appointed counsel, which has delayed my petition, to which I would now add the records denial of Mr. Waters, and the ongoing records violations of Grace Fagan and the Fifth Judicial Circuit, and their added requirements not imposed by Fla. R. Jud. Admin. Rule 2.420(m)(1). Would that be a motion for rehearing, with new matters? Thank you.

Sincerely,

Neil J. Gillespie 8092 SW 115th Loop Ocala, FL 34481 Tel. 352-854-7807

----- Original Message ----- From: Minter, Matthew To: Neil Gillespie Cc: Hernandez, Barbra ; Doty, Danielle ; Mitchell, Yvonne Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 2:51 PM Subject: RE: Sec. 19-179(1) POLICY DISPUTE - Marion County Utilities (MCU) Mr. Gillespie:    With respect to your message below, and your public records request dated January 2, 2015, neither I nor the County Attorney’s office have any records related to the Proclamations of Confederate History Month referenced in your letter.   My office did not prepare those proclamations, and had no involvement in handling or processing those documents.   The same answer applies to any records for the fundraising to move “Johnny Reb,” and any accounts related thereto.  We have no records on those topics.    The same answer applies to any records related to the reported receipt by Marion County of $2.5 million in federal stimulus funding.    We have no records on those topics.     I therefor defer to whatever Mr. Harrell has reported to you with respect to records in the possession of the Clerk.      Sincerely, Guy Minter  

From: Neil Gillespie [mailto:neilgillespie@mfi.net] Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 7:22 PM To: Doty, Danielle; McClain, Stan; Bryant, Kathy; Minter, Matthew; Arnett, Earl; Moore, David; Zalak, Carl; Kauffman, William; Turner, Lindsay; Zachary, Robert; Mellinger, Flip; Chaney, Lourdes; Jarvis, Nancy; Hernandez, Barbra; Harvey, Jean; Taylor, Dana; Rickman, Jeannie Cc: Neil Gillespie

Page 4 of 7

4/27/2015

Subject: Sec. 19-179(1) POLICY DISPUTE - Marion County Utilities (MCU)

Mr. Kauffman, see attached my Sec. 19-179(1) POLICY DISPUTE - Marion County Utilities (MCU). The paper copy will ship tomorrow by UPS. The pickup deadline for today has passed. Please credit my Account No: 010456-01 in the amount of $55.

Regarding Ms. Doty's public record comments below, I believe she is mistaken. Mr. Minter may have records that Mr. Harrell does not have or even know about. Therefore, my records request to Mr. Minter is still open. Records not provided. I also communicated with Mr. Harrell, and he was unaware of the Proclamations until I requested records. The BOCC authorized the Proclamations, and with Mr. Minter, may have more records. Thank you.

Sincerely, Neil J. Gillespie

----- Original Message ----- From: Doty, Danielle To: Neil Gillespie Cc: Hernandez, Barbra ; Rickman, Jeannie Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 8:09 PM Subject: RE: SECOND REQUEST: Records request to County Attorney Guy Minter-Jan-02-2015 Good evening Mr. Gillespie,   In researching your public records request to the County Attorney, I learned from the Clerk of the Court’s staff that they have already fulfilled the majority of the request. I spoke with the Clerk’s General Counsel, Greg Harrell, and he has sent me all of his correspondence to you which addresses the proclamations, the finance records of the fundraising for the Johnny Reb statue, and the finance records of Marion County’s use of federal stimulus funds.   In regard to the last portion of your request concerning your utility account, our Utilities Director has confirmed that nothing has changed since last summer. As you stated, you received a notification from Dr. Lee Niblock explaining that your account would be credited $150, but the $55 transfer fee was still applicable. That action remains in place as the final determination of your request for a refund.   This information fulfills your public records request.   Thank you,   Danielle Damato Doty Business and Communications Liaison Public and Administrative Services Marion County Board of County Commissioners 601 SE 25th Ave., Ocala, FL 34471

Page 5 of 7

4/27/2015

Office: 352‐438‐2301 www.marioncountyfl.org   

   

From: Hernandez, Barbra Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 3:34 PM To: Neil Gillespie Cc: Zachary, Robert; Mellinger, Flip; Jarvis, Nancy; Harvey, Jean; Taylor, Dana; Turner, Lindsay; Doty, Danielle; Griffis, Nadja Subject: RE: SECOND REQUEST: Records request to County Attorney Guy Minter-Jan-02-2015 Mr. Gillespie, This confirms receipt of your public records request. We will research it and advise you of any estimated labor and reproduction costs associated with fulfilling this request before proceeding any further. If no labor costs are anticipated, we will proceed to email you the requested records as available.   Thanks, Barbra Hernández, APR Public Information Manager Marion County Office of Public Information 601 SE 25th Ave., Ocala, FL 34471 Office: 352-438-2310 www.marioncountyfl.org  

From: Neil Gillespie [mailto:neilgillespie@mfi.net] Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 5:04 PM To: Minter, Matthew; McClain, Stan; Bryant, Kathy; Arnett, Earl; Moore, David; Zalak, Carl; Zachary, Robert; Mellinger, Flip; Jarvis, Nancy; Hernandez, Barbra; Harvey, Jean; Taylor, Dana; Turner, Lindsay Cc: Neil Gillespie Subject: SECOND REQUEST: Records request to County Attorney Guy Minter-Jan-02-2015 ----- Original Message ----- From: Neil Gillespie To: Matthew Minter Cc: Neil Gillespie Sent: Friday, January 02, 2015 1:33 PM

Page 6 of 7

4/27/2015

Subject: Records request to County Attorney Guy Minter-Jan-02-2015

Under Florida law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by phone or in writing.

Under Florida law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by phone or in writing.

Page 7 of 7

4/27/2015

Search The Florida Bar

THE FLORIDA BAR / Rules

The Florida Barwww.floridabar.org

RULE 4-1.1 COMPETENCE

4 RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

4-1 CLIENT-LAWYER RELATIONSHIP

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.

Comment

Legal knowledge and skill

In determining whether a lawyer employs the requisite knowledge and skill in a particular matter, relevant factors include therelative complexity and specialized nature of the matter, the lawyer's general experience, the lawyer's training and experience in thefield in question, the preparation and study the lawyer is able to give the matter, and whether it is feasible to refer the matter to, orassociate or consult with, a lawyer of established competence in the field in question. In many instances the required proficiency isthat of a general practitioner. Expertise in a particular field of law may be required in some circumstances.

A lawyer need not necessarily have special training or prior experience to handle legal problems of a type with which the lawyer isunfamiliar. A newly admitted lawyer can be as competent as a practitioner with long experience. Some important legal skills, suchas the analysis of precedent, the evaluation of evidence and legal drafting, are required in all legal problems. Perhaps the mostfundamental legal skill consists of determining what kind of legal problems a situation may involve, a skill that necessarilytranscends any particular specialized knowledge. A lawyer can provide adequate representation in a wholly novel field throughnecessary study. Competent representation can also be provided through the association of a lawyer of established competence inthe field in question.

In an emergency a lawyer may give advice or assistance in a matter in which the lawyer does not have the skill ordinarily requiredwhere referral to or consultation or association with another lawyer would be impractical. Even in an emergency, however,assistance should be limited to that reasonably necessary in the circumstances, for ill-considered action under emergency conditionscan jeopardize the client's interest.

A lawyer may accept representation where the requisite level of competence can be achieved by reasonable preparation. Thisapplies as well to a lawyer who is appointed as counsel for an unrepresented person. See also rule 4-6.2.

Thoroughness and preparation

Competent handling of a particular matter includes inquiry into and analysis of the factual and legal elements of the problem, anduse of methods and procedures meeting the standards of competent practitioners. It also includes adequate preparation. Therequired attention and preparation are determined in part by what is at stake; major litigation and complex transactions ordinarilyrequire more extensive treatment than matters of lesser complexity and consequence. The lawyer should consult with the clientabout the degree of thoroughness and the level of preparation required as well as the estimated costs involved under the

ABOUT THE BAR NEWS & EVENTS FOR THE PUBLIC MEMBER SERVICES LOG IN FIND A LAWYER

http://www.floridabar.org/divexe/rrtfb.nsf/FV/63890D65476BC14985257170006C3936

3

About the Bar

President's Page

Board of Governors

Committees

Sections & Divisions

What We Do

Frequently Asked Questions

History

Past Presidents

Strategic Plan & Research

Working at the Bar

Contact Us

Diversity

Leadership Academy

News, Events &Publications

Daily News Summary

The Florida Bar News

The Florida Bar Journal

News Releases

Calendars

Meetings

Media Resources

Reporter's Handbook

Issue Papers

Publications

For the Public

Attorney Discipline

Consumer Information

Speakers Bureau

Lawyer Referral Service

The Vote's in Your Court

Fair & Impartial Courts

Clients' Security Fund

Prepaid Legal Services

Pro Bono/Legal Aid

Unlicensed Practice of Law

Member Services

Continuing Legal Education

Board Certification

Benefits and Discounts

Employment Opportunities

Lawyers Advising Lawyers

Florida Lawyers Assistance

E-filing Resources

Practice Resource Institute

Pro Bono Information

Legislative Activity

Lawyer Referral

Voluntary Bar Center

Directories

Search for a Lawyer

Browse Lawyers by Location

Browse Lawyers by Certification

Browse Lawyers by Section

Browse Lawyers by Committee

Authorized House Counsel

Certified Foreign LegalConsultant

Florida Registered Paralegals

Law Faculty Affiliate Members

Courts & Judges

Florida Bar Staff

Legal Groups & Law Schools

Judicial NominatingCommissions

Research &Professionalism

Ethics Opinions

Rules Regulating the Bar

Fastcase Legal Research

PRI - Practice Resource Institute

Henry Latimer Center forProfessionalism

circumstances.

Maintaining competence

To maintain the requisite knowledge and skill, a lawyer should keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, engage incontinuing study and education, and comply with all continuing legal education requirements to which the lawyer is subject.

[Revised: 05/22/2006]

http://www.floridabar.org/divexe/rrtfb.nsf/FV/63890D65476BC14985257170006C3936

Search The Florida Bar

THE FLORIDA BAR / Rules

The Florida Barwww.floridabar.org

RULE 4-1.3 DILIGENCE

4 RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

4-1 CLIENT-LAWYER RELATIONSHIP

RULE 4-1.3 DILIGENCE

A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client.

Comment

A lawyer should pursue a matter on behalf of a client despite opposition, obstruction, or personal inconvenience to the lawyer andtake whatever lawful and ethical measures are required to vindicate a client's cause or endeavor. A lawyer must also act withcommitment and dedication to the interests of the client and with zeal in advocacy upon the client's behalf. A lawyer is not bound,however, to press for every advantage that might be realized for a client. For example, a lawyer may have authority to exerciseprofessional discretion in determining the means by which a matter should be pursued. See rule 4-1.2. The lawyer's duty to act withreasonable diligence does not require the use of offensive tactics or preclude the treating of all persons involved in the legal processwith courtesy and respect.

A lawyer's workload must be controlled so that each matter can be handled competently.

Perhaps no professional shortcoming is more widely resented than procrastination. A client's interests often can be adverselyaffected by the passage of time or the change of conditions; in extreme instances, as when a lawyer overlooks a statute oflimitations, the client's legal position may be destroyed. Even when the client's interests are not affected in substance, however,unreasonable delay can cause a client needless anxiety and undermine confidence in the lawyer. A lawyer's duty to act withreasonable promptness, however, does not preclude the lawyer from agreeing to a reasonable request for a postponement that willnot prejudice the lawyer's client.

Unless the relationship is terminated as provided in rule 4-1.16, a lawyer should carry through to conclusion all matters undertakenfor a client. If a lawyer's employment is limited to a specific matter, the relationship terminates when the matter has been resolved. Ifa lawyer has served a client over a substantial period in a variety of matters, the client sometimes may assume that the lawyer willcontinue to serve on a continuing basis unless the lawyer gives notice of withdrawal. Doubt about whether a client-lawyerrelationship still exists should be clarified by the lawyer, preferably in writing, so that the client will not mistakenly suppose thelawyer is looking after the client's affairs when the lawyer has ceased to do so. For example, if a lawyer has handled a judicial oradministrative proceeding that produced a result adverse to the client and the lawyer and the client have not agreed that the lawyerwill handle the matter on appeal, the lawyer must consult with the client about the possibility of appeal before relinquishingresponsibility for the matter. See rule 4-1.4(a)(2). Whether the lawyer is obligated to prosecute the appeal for the client depends onthe scope of the representation the lawyer has agreed to provide to the client. See rule 4-1.2.

[Revised: 05/22/2006]

ABOUT THE BAR NEWS & EVENTS FOR THE PUBLIC MEMBER SERVICES LOG IN FIND A LAWYER

http://www.floridabar.org/divexe/rrtfb.nsf/FV/7CAA33D4D0F911B585257170006DC334

4

About the Bar

President's Page

Board of Governors

Committees

Sections & Divisions

What We Do

Frequently Asked Questions

History

Past Presidents

Strategic Plan & Research

Working at the Bar

Contact Us

Diversity

Leadership Academy

News, Events &Publications

Daily News Summary

The Florida Bar News

The Florida Bar Journal

News Releases

Calendars

Meetings

Media Resources

Reporter's Handbook

Issue Papers

Publications

For the Public

Attorney Discipline

Consumer Information

Speakers Bureau

Lawyer Referral Service

The Vote's in Your Court

Fair & Impartial Courts

Clients' Security Fund

Prepaid Legal Services

Pro Bono/Legal Aid

Unlicensed Practice of Law

Member Services

Continuing Legal Education

Board Certification

Benefits and Discounts

Employment Opportunities

Lawyers Advising Lawyers

Florida Lawyers Assistance

E-filing Resources

Practice Resource Institute

Pro Bono Information

Legislative Activity

Lawyer Referral

Voluntary Bar Center

Directories

Search for a Lawyer

Browse Lawyers by Location

Browse Lawyers by Certification

Browse Lawyers by Section

Browse Lawyers by Committee

Authorized House Counsel

Certified Foreign LegalConsultant

Florida Registered Paralegals

Law Faculty Affiliate Members

Courts & Judges

Florida Bar Staff

Legal Groups & Law Schools

Judicial NominatingCommissions

Research &Professionalism

Ethics Opinions

Rules Regulating the Bar

Fastcase Legal Research

PRI - Practice Resource Institute

Henry Latimer Center forProfessionalism

http://www.floridabar.org/divexe/rrtfb.nsf/FV/7CAA33D4D0F911B585257170006DC334

~ Social Security Administration Retirement, Survivors and Disability Insurance Notice of Award

Office of Disability and International Operations 1500 Woodlawn Drive Baltimore, Maryland 21241-0001 Date: August 23, 1993 Claim Number: 160-52-5117HA

NEIL J GILLESPIE 266 7 AVE NE APT 5 ST PETERSBURG, FL 33701-2651 1•• 11 ••• 11.1 ••• 111 •••••• 11 •• 1.1.11 ••• 1.1 •••• 11.11 ••• 11 •• 11 •••1

We recently told you that you met the medical requirements to receive Social Security benefits. Now we are writing to tell you that you meet the other requirements. Therefore you qualify for monthly disability benefits from Social Security beginning July 1992.

However, we cannot pay you for July 1992 through July 1993.

The Date You Became Disabled

We found that you became disabled under our rules on January 17, 1992. This is different from the date given on the application.

Also, you have to be disabled for 5 full calendar months in a row before you can be entitled to benefits. For these reasons, your first month of entitlement to benefits is July 1992.

What We Will Pay And When

• You will receive $1,185.00 for August 1993 around September 3, 1993.

• After that you will receive $1,185.00 each month.

Your Benefits

We raised your monthly benefit amount beginning December 1992 because the cost of living increased.

Enclosure(s): Pub 05-10072 Pub 05-10153

See Next Page c

5

. 160-52-5117HA Page 2 of 3

Other Government Payments Affect Benefits

Besides the money we are sending you now, you may be due some more Social Security money for July 1992 through July 1993. We must first subtract the amount of your Supplemental Security Income payments for some or all of these months from the Social Security money you are due. When we figure the amount we have to subtract, we will send another letter to show how it was done. If you are still due some money after the subtraction, we will also send you a check.

Other Social Security Benefits

The benefit described in this letter is the only one you can receive from Social Security. If you think that you might qualify for another kind of Social Security benefit in the future, you will have to file another application.

Do You Disagree With The Decision?

If you think we are wrong, you have the right to appeal. A person who did not make the first decision will decide your case. We will correct any mistakes. We will review those parts of the decision which you believe are wrong and will look at any new facts you have. We may also review those parts which you believe are correct and may make them unfavorable or less favorable to you.

• You have 60 days to ask for an appeal.

• The 60 days start the day after you receive this letter.

• You must have a good reason if you wait more than 60 days to ask for an appeal.

Things To Remember For The Future

The doctors and other trained personnel who decided that you are disabled expect your health to improve. Therefore, we will review your case in July 1994. We will send you a letter before we start the review. Based on that review, your benefits will continue if you are still disabled, but will end if no longer disabled.

For you to be considered disabled under our rules, your health problems must keep you from doing not only your usual work, but also any other kind of substantial gainful work.

Also, you must meet this requirement at the same time when you have earned enough credits for work under Social Security. The last date when you will have earned enough credits is December 1994.

Please read the enclosed pamphlet, "How You Earn Social Security Credits," which explains how the credits are earned and how many a person needs to receive benefits.

• 160-52-5117HA Page 3 of 3

Your Responsibilities

The decisions we made on your claim are based on information you gave us. If this information changes, it could affect your benefits. For this reason, it is important that you report changes to us right away.

We have enclosed a pamphlet, "When You Get Social Security Disability Benefits...What You Need To Know." It will tell you what must be reported and how to report. Please be sure to read the parts of the pamphlet which explain what to do if you go to work or if your health improves.

If You Want Help With Your Appeal

You can have a friend, lawyer or someone else help you. There are groups that can help you find a lawyer or give you free legal services if you qualify. There are also lawyers who do not charge unless you win your appeal. Your local Social Security office has a list of groups that can help you with your appeal.

If you get someone to help you, you should let us know. If you hire someone, we must approve the fee before he or she can collect it. And if you hire a lawyer, we will withhold up to 25 percent of any past due benefits to pay toward the fee.

If You Have Any Questions

If you have any questions, call us toll free at 1-800-772-1213. We can answer most questions over the phone. You can also write or visit any Social Security office. The office that serves your area is located at:

DISTRICT OFFICE 898 30TH AVE NORTH ST PETERSBURG, FL 33704

If you do call or visit an office, please have this letter with you. It will help us answer your questions.

v Cl ..~ ~ //~~q

Louis D. Enoff Acting Commissioner

of Social Security

6

Page 1 of2

Timberridge Imaging Center RADIOLOGY 9521 SW HWY 200 Ocala, FL 34481 ASSOCIATES Phone #: (352)401-3200

(_)F ()Cl\Ll\, P.J~' Fax: (352)732-8010

Name: Neil J Gillespie Referrer: CESAR R GAMERO, MD Secondary 10: Address: 9401 SW HWY 200 BLD 2000 SUITE 2004 Exam Date: 03/16/2015 04:20 PM OCALA, FL 34481 Gender: Male DOB: 03/19/1956 Phone: (352)854-7807 Acc#: 81311660 CC:Referrer 2:

HISTORY: Cervical radiculopathy.

EXAM: CT CERVICAL SPINE WITH COMPUTERIZED MULTIPLANAR RECONSTRUCTION.

TECHNIQUE: A helical examination was performed through the cervical spine without contrast. Computerized multiplanar reconstruction was performed.

FINDINGS:

Comparison: MRI of the cervical spine 8/28/2007.

No significant spondylolisthesis.

C2-3, no significant spinal canal or neural foramina narrowing.

C3-4, no significant spinal canal or neural foramina narrowing.

C4-5, no significant spinal canal or neural foramina narrowing.

C5-6, moderate to severe left neural foramina stenosis due to uncovertebral joint hypertrophy. It is difficult to adequately evaluate the spinal canal due to beam hardening artifact from the patient's shoulders.

C6-C7, no significant neural foramina narrowing. Difficult to adequately evaluate the spinal canal due to large body habitus.

C7-T1, no significant neural foramina narrowing.

Impression: 1. Difficult to adequately evaluate the spinal canal from C5-6 through C7-T1 due to beam hardening artifact secondary to large body habitus. 2. At C5-6, moderate to severe left neural foramina stenosis due to uncovertebral joint hypertrophy.

Board Certified - Diagnostic Radiology, N.~W::9X~m9J9gy.

Specialty - N~vt9XS\sij,~t9.iY.

Signed by: RALF BARCKHAUSEN M.D.

3/27/2015http://l 72.20.3 .122/Reports/printReportCustom.aspx?acc=81311660

7

Page 2 of2

Signed on: 03/16/2015 04:29 PM

3/27/2015http://l 72.20.3 .122/Reports/printReportCustom.aspx?acc=81311660

Accu-Chek CompassOne Page Summary Report4/7/2015 - 4/20/2015

Neil J. GillespieBirth Date: 3/19/1956

050

100150200250300350400450500550600

4/72015

4/8 4/9 4/10 4/11 4/12 4/13 4/14 4/15 4/16 4/17 4/18 4/19 4/20

bG (m

g/dL

)

Trend GraphTrend Graph

050

100150200250300350400450500550600

Night BeforeBreakfast

AfterBreakfast

BeforeLunch

AfterLunch

BeforeDinner

AfterDinner

Evening

bG (m

g/dL

)

Average DayAverage Day

Target RangeTarget RangeOverallOverall

Above 100.0% (14 tests)

Before MealsBefore Meals

Above 100.0% (8 tests)

After MealsAfter Meals

Above 100.0% (5 tests)

Above Target Within Target Below Target Hypo

( > 140 mg/dL ): ( 70 - 140 mg/dL ): ( 50 - 69 mg/dL ): ( < 50 mg/dL ):

14000

100.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%

Highest bG (mg/dL): Lowest bG (mg/dL): Average bG (mg/dL): Number of HIs: Number of LOs:

485242

328.900

Total # of Tests: Avg. # Tests per Day: Standard Deviation:

141.0

73.0

Range Tests Percent

Page 1 of 1Printed: 4/20/2015 Roche Diagnostics

8

9

Case: 13-11585 Date Filed: 07/25/2013 Page: 1 of 1

10

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

ELBERT PARR TUTTLE COURT OF APPEALS BUILDING 56 Forsyth Street, N.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30303

John Ley Clerk of Court

July 25, 2013

For rules and forms visit www.ca11.uscourts.gov

Neil J. Gillespie 8092 SW 115TH LOOP OCALA, FL 34481 Appeal Number: 13-11585-B Case Style: Reverse Mortgage Solutions, In v. Neil Gillespie, et al District Court Docket No: 5:13-cv-00058-WTH-PRL This Court requires all counsel to file documents electronically using the Electronic Case Files ("ECF") system, unless exempted for good cause.

The enclosed order has been ENTERED. Sincerely, JOHN LEY, Clerk of Court Reply to: Melanie Gaddis, B/rvg Phone #: (404) 335-6187

MOT-2 Notice of Court Action

Case: 13-11585 Date Filed: 07/25/2013 Page: 1 of 1

Case: 13-11585 Date Filed: 01/13/2015 Page: 1 of 1

11

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

ELBERT PARR TUTTLE COURT OF APPEALS BUILDING 56 Forsyth Street, N.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30303

John Ley Clerk of Court

January 20, 2015

For rules and forms visit www.ca11.uscourts.gov

Neil J. Gillespie 8092 SW 115TH LOOP OCALA, FL 34481 Appeal Number: 13-11585-B Case Style: Reverse Mortgage Solutions, In v. Neil Gillespie, et al District Court Docket No: 5:13-cv-00058-WTH-PRL I am returning to you unfiled the papers which you have submitted. In the absence of a pending appeal, as required by Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, this court has no jurisdiction to grant the relief requested. This appeal was dismissed on 6/12/2013, and reconsideration on 7/25/2013. No further action will be taken. Sincerely, JOHN LEY, Clerk of Court Reply to: Melanie Gaddis, B Phone #: (404) 335-6187 Enclosure(s)

PRO-3 Letter Returning Papers Unfiled

Case: 13-11585 Date Filed: 01/13/2015 Page: 1 of 1

12