Notice of CM-ECF Prohibition by the District Court

unless he pays $455 to the District Court. Gillespie is indigent and/or insolvent and  cannot pay the fee. The extra cost of paper filing to Gillespie of not less than $1,094.94 represents money that could have been used to pay the fees. 3.

The additional time required of a pro se litigant for paper-only filing is a burden.

This burden is especially onerous to the disabled. Gillespie is disabled. Gillespie spent not less than 178.5 hours filing paper documents. The time saved by e-filing would have allowed Gillespie to make better pleadings. This extra time burden is unconstitutional. PACER and CM/ECF 4.

Publ Public ic Acces Accesss to to Cour Courtt Ele Elect ctro roni nicc Reco Record rdss (PA (PACE CER) R) is an elect electro roni nicc publ public ic

access service that allows users to obtain case and an d docket information from federal appellate, district and bankruptcy courts, and the PACER Case Locator via the Internet. PACER is provided by the federal Judiciary in keeping with its commitment to providing  public access to court information via a centralized service. See http://www.pacer.gov/ 5.

Thee Case Th Case Mana Managem gement ent/E /Ele lect ctro roni nicc Cas Casee Fili Filing ng (CM (CM/E /ECF CF)) sys syste tem m is is the the Feder Federal al

Judiciary's comprehensive case management system for all bankruptcy, district and  appellate courts. CM/ECF allows courts to accept filings and provide access to filed  documents over the Internet. See http://www.pacer.gov/cmecf/ (Exhibit 1). CM/ECF keeps out-of-pocket expenses low, gives concurrent c oncurrent access to case files  by multiple parties, and offers expanded search and reporting capabilities. The system also offers the ability to: immediately update dockets and make them available to users, file pleadings electronically with the court, and download documents and print them directly from the court system. See http://www.pacer.gov/cmecf/ (Exhibit 1)

CM/ECF Policy in the U.S. District Court, Co urt, Middle District of Florida

6.

Thee Unit Th United ed Sta State tess Dist Distri rict ct Cour Courtt for for the the Mid Middl dlee Dist Distri rict ct of of Flor Florid idaa file filed da

CM/ECF Administrative Procedures Order, No. 6:07-MC-0027-ORL-19, by Chief Judge Patricia C. Fawsett, signed February 28, 2007. (Exhibit 2). The Order states that electronic filing is mandatory: I(A) EFFECTIVE DATE Electronic filing is mandatory, unless otherwise permitted by these administrative  procedures, by a general order of the Court, or by authorization of the Judge;. All documents filed in Civil and Criminal cases in this District on o r after July 12, 2004, no matter when a case was originally filed, shall be filed electronically. The Court’s CM/ECF Order requires pro se to file in paper pa per format unless authorized to file electronically, but provides no information on how to obtain such authorization: III(C) PRO SE FILER  Unless authorized to file electronically, a pro se filer shall file any pleading and  other paper in paper format. The Clerk will scan and file these papers pape rs electronically and will also maintain a paper file of such documents. If authorized   by the assigned Judge, a party proceeding pro se may file electronically. If  authorized to file electronically, the pro se filer must follow these procedures. 7.

Thee Midd Th Middle le Dis Distr tric ict’ t’ss CM/E CM/ECF CF Ord Order er is is disc discri rimi minat nator ory y on its its fac facee to pro pro se se file filers rs,,

and contrary to PACER’s mandate - “Public Access” to Court Electronic Records. The Court’s Order violates the Constitutionally protected rights of pro se filers as follows: First Amendment, Pro se free speech, pro se right to petition for a governmental redress of grievances, in the customary manner; Fifth Amendment, depravation of liberty to pro se filers to file electronically; Eighth Amendment, prohibition from excessive fines; the excessive cost to pro se filers to make, transport, and mail or serve by courier paper filings to the Court;

 Ninth and Tenth Amendments, the Constitution does not prohibit pro se electronic filing, so that right is retained by the people; peo ple; Fourteenth Amendment, the due process clause, and the equal protection clause. 8.

Gill Gilles espi piee subm submit itte ted d Octobe Octoberr 1, 201 2010 0 “Plai “Plaint ntif iff’ f’ss Moti Motion on to to File File Ele Elect ctro roni nical cally ly”” in

Gillespie v. The Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Florida, et al., case no. 5:10-cv-503-ocWTH-DAB, U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, Ocala Division. (Doc. 6) (Exhibit 3). The motion was brief, at the suggestion of personnel in the Clerk’s office: Pursuant to local Rule 1.0t(a) Plaintiff pro se Gillespie moves to file documents electronically in this lawsuit. The Court’s CM/ECF Order, described above in paragraph 6, and attached as Exhibit 2, does not provide further instruction on obtaining pro se e-filing authorization. 9.

U.S. U.S. Magi Magist stra rate te Judge Judge Davi David d A. A. Bar Barker ker Deni Denied ed by by Ord Order er (Doc. (Doc. 17) 17) Octo October ber 24,

2010, Gillespie’s motion to e-file. (Exhibit 4). The Court held: Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion To File Electronically ( Doc. No. 6). Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, seeks leave to file documents electronically in this action. Pro se litigants, however, are generally not permitted  access to the Court’s Case Management and Electronic Case Filing (“CM/ECF”) system unless extenuating circumstances exist. Because Plaintiff has failed to state any reason why he needs access to the CM/ECF system, Plaintiff’s Motion To File Electronically (Doc. No. 6) is DENIED. The Court’s Order does not give Gillespie leave to amend his motion, or show cause of  extenuating circumstances, or any other reason to e-file. However it should be obvious that a pro se litigant would want to e-file for the same reasons that attorneys e-file: CM/ECF keeps out-of-pocket expenses low, gives concurrent c oncurrent access to case files  by multiple parties, and offers expanded search and reporting capabilities. The system also offers the ability to: immediately update dockets and make them available to users, file pleadings electronically with the court, and download  documents and print them directly from the court system.

$811.48 Additional Cost of Paper Filing in Case No. 5:10-cv-503-oc-WTH-DAB 130.5 Additional Hours Time Spent Filing Paper in Case No. 5:10-cv-503-oc-WTH-DAB 10.

a. Gill Gillesp espie ie esti estimat mates es that that he incur incurred red not less less than than $811.48 $811.48 in in additi additional onal expense expensess

in case no. 5:10-cv-503 because bec ause the Court denied his motion to e-file. Gillespie resides 13.9 miles from the Court, according to Google Maps. (Exhibit 5). A round trip is 27.8 miles. To file paper documents with the Court, Cou rt, Gillespie must either hand deliver the documents to the Court, or drive to the post office and mail the documents, or hire a courier service to deliver the documents to the Court. Each of these options op tions are costly and  time consuming, but hand delivery appears a ppears to be the most efficient.  b. Gillespie believes he made not less than 31 round trips in his vehicle to file  paper documents, which amounts to not less than 861.8 miles. At least 9 trips were made in 2010, at least seventeen 17 trips made in 2011, and at least 5 trips in 2012. c. Gillespie estimates his mileage cost for filing paper documents at $461.48. The standard business mileage rate set by the Internal Revenue Service in 2010 was 50 cents  per mile; in 2011 the rate was 55.5 cents per mile; in 2012 the rate is 55.5 cents per mile. 2010: 9 trips x 27.8 miles each = 250.20 miles x $0.50 = $125.10 2011: 17 trips x 27.8 miles each = 472.60 miles x $0.55 = $259.93 2012: 5 trips x 27.8 miles each = 139 miles x $0.55 = $76.45 Total mileage costs: $461.48 d. Gillespie estimates his postage cost at $150 for filing and serving paper  documents by mail. While relatively few paper documents were mailed to the court, there was postage to serve copies to the parties, as well as to mail Rule 4(d) waivers of service.

e. Gillespie estimates his paper and printing cost at $200 for filing and serving  paper documents by mail, for paper, envelopes, ink, toner, and drum cartridges, etc. Total for postage and supplies: $350.00 Total costs to file paper in case no. 5:10-cv-503-oc-WTH-DAB: $811.48 11.

Gilles Gillespie pie spent spent at least least 46.5 46.5 hours hours drivi driving ng to to the the Court Court to to file file paper paper document documents. s.

Google maps estimates about 28 minutes to drive d rive from Gillespie’s residence to the Court. (Exhibit 5). A round trip is 56 minutes. Additional time is needed to park, walk to the Court building, pass through security, ride the elevator to the third floor, and file paper  documents with a deputy clerk. The entire process takes about 1.5 hours. Gillespie made not less than 31 trips to the Court, and expended about 46.5 hours - over a week’s work. (31 trips x 1.5 hours = 46.5 hours). In addition, for items filed in paper, approximately ap proximately two hours average additional time is needed to print and assemble paper documents for  hand delivery to the Court, and a nd more time to prepare documents documen ts for mailing to the Court, or to serve paper documents by mail on parties. (42 filings x 2 hours ho urs = 84 hours). Gillespie believes that two hours is a conservative estimate of the time needed to  physically assemble, and prepare for hand delivery or mailing, paper documents to the court. Simple filings take less time, and larger paper filings take much longer to prepare. Total time to file paper in case no. n o. 5:10-cv-503-oc-WTH-DAB: 130.5 hours. (46.5 + 84). $283.46 Additional Cost of Paper Filing in Case No. 5:11-cv-539-oc-WTH-TBS 48 Additional Hours of Time Spent Filing Paper in Case No. 5:11-cv-539-oc-WTH-TBS

12.

a. Gill Gillesp espie ie esti estimat mates es that that he incur incurred red not less less than than $283.4 $283.46 6 in additio additional nal expense expensess

in case no. 5:11-cv-539 because bec ause he was not authorized to e-file. Gillespie estimates his mileage cost for filing paper documents at $183.46: $1 83.46: 2011: 6 trips x 27.8 miles each = 166.8 miles x $0.55 = $91.74 2012: 6 trips x 27.8 miles each = 166.8 miles x $0.55 = $91.74 Total mileage costs: $183.48.  b. Gillespie estimates his postage cost at $25 for serving paper documents by mail. While no paper documents were mailed to the court in this case, there was postage to serve copies on the parties, and to mail Rule 4(d) waivers of service to parties. c. Gillespie estimates his paper and printing cost at $75 for filing and serving  paper documents, for paper, envelopes, ink, toner, and drum cartridges, etc. Total for postage and supplies: $100. Total costs to file paper in case no. 5:11-cv-539-oc-WTH-TBS: $283.48. 13.

Gilles Gillespie pie spent spent not less less than than 18 hours hours driv driving ing to the Court Court to to file file paper  paper 

documents. As described in paragraph 11, the entire process takes about 1.5 hours. Gillespie made not less than 12 trips to the Court. (12 trips x 1.5 hours = 18 hours). For  items filed in paper, approximately two hours average additional time is needed to print and assemble paper documents for hand delivery to the Court, and more time to prepare documents for service by mail to parties. (15 filings x 2 hours = 30 hours). Total time to file paper in case no. n o. 5:11-cv-539-oc-WTH-TBS: 48 hours. (18 + 30). Combined Totals for Additional Costs and Time 14. 14.

Comb Combin ined ed tota totals ls calc calcul ulat ated ed as foll follow ows: s:

Total costs to file paper in case no. no . 5:10-cv-503-oc-WTH-DAB: $811.48. Total costs to file paper in case no. no . 5:11-cv-539-oc-WTH-TBS: $283.48. Combined total costs to file paper in both cases: $1,094.96. Total time to file paper in case no. n o. 5:10-cv-503-oc-WTH-DAB: 130.5 hours. Total time to file paper in case no. n o. 5:11-cv-539-oc-WTH-TBS: 48 hours. Combined time to file paper in both cases: 178.50 hours. Seven (7) Hour Time Advantage with Electronic Case Filing in District Court 15.

There There is a seven seven (7) hou hourr time time advanta advantage ge to to e-fil e-filing ing within within the same same time time zone zone..

The Ocala Clerk’s offices closes at 4:00 p.m., with after-hours drop off until 5:00 p.m. Those authorized to e-file have until midnight. FRCP, Rule 6. Computing and Extending Time; Time for Motion Papers Rule 6(a)(4) “Last Day” Defined. Unless a different time is set by a statute, local rule, or court order, the last day ends: (A) for electronic filing, at midnight in the court's time zo ne; and  (B) for filing by other means, when the clerk's office is scheduled to close. E-Filing as a Disability Accommodation 16.

Gillespie’s motion to e-file is a reasonable disability accommodation request. a. Gillespie’s disability request submitted to the District Court September 28,

2010 in case no. 5:10-cv-503, and resubmitted publicly in Plaintiff Neil J. Gillespie’s  Notice of Filing “Verified Notice of Filing Disability Information of Neil J. Gillespie”

(Doc. 36) , Exhibit 2, page 17, states as follows: “ADA Request No.6: Mr. Gillespie requests time to scan thousands of pages of  documents in this case to electronic PDF format. This case and underlying cause of action covers a ten year period and the files have become unmanageable and  confusing relative to Gillespie's disability. Mr. Gillespie is not able to concentrate when handling a large amount of physical files and documents. He is better able to manage the files and documents when they are organized and viewable on his

computer. Mr. Gillespie will bear the cost of converting conve rting files and documents to PDF.” (Doc. 36, Page 47 of 62 Page ID 803). Gillespie’s disability notice to the Court (Doc. 36) shows Depression, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Diabetes Type II Adult Onset, Traumatic Brain Injury, and  Velopharyngeal Incompetence.  b. The notice shows that “Since March 3, 2006, Ryan Christopher Rodems, counsel for the Defendants, has directed, with malice aforethought, a course of harassing conduct toward Gillespie that has aggravated his disability, caused substantial emotional distress and serves no legitimate purpose…Gillespie is disabled, and Mr. Rodems knows of Gillespie's disability from Defendants' prior representation of him.” (Doc. 36, Page 1 of 62 Page ID 757). The notice shows in paragraph 3 a statement on the record by Gillespie’s former attorney Robert W. Bauer about Mr. Rodems: Rode ms: 3. Mr. Rodems has set a level of animosity in this lawsuit best described by Gillespie’s former attorney Robert W. Bauer August Bauer August 14, 2008 during an Emergency Hearing on garnishment before Judge Marva Crenshaw (p16, line 24): 24 Mr. Rodems has, you know, decided to take a full 25 nuclear blast approach instead of us trying to work  1 this out in a professional manner. It is my 2 mistake for sitting back and giving him the 3 opportunity to take this full blast attack. Mr. Rodems' "full nuclear blast approach" has aggravated Gillespie's disability to the point where Gillespie can no longer represent himself at hearings. Gillespie  becomes easily distracted and confused, and can no longer speak coherently enough during a hearing to represent himself. See Plaintiff’s Motion For   Appointment Of Counsel, ADA Accommodation Request, and Memorandum of   Law filed May 24, 2011. (Doc. 36, Page 2 of 62 Page ID 758)

c. The Complaint (Doc. 1) shows Florida attorney Seldon J. Childers estimated on September 17, 2009 the non-pecuniary cost of this litigation to Gillespie at $100,000 for   physical and emotional ill effects resulting from the litigation. litigation. (Doc. 1, ¶135, page pag e 39). d. A study by the World Health Organisation shows depression is more damaging to everyday health than chronic c hronic diseases such as angina, arthritis, asthma and diabetes. d iabetes. Researchers found if people are ill with other conditions, depression makes them worse. Somnath Chatterji of the World Health Organisation led the study. The most disabling combination was diabetes and depression, the researchers said. "If you live for one year  yea r  with diabetes and depression together you are living the equivalent of 60 percent of full health," Chatterji said in a telephone interview. News of this study was reported by Reuters on September 7, 2007. (Exhibit 6). The study is reported in the Lancet Medical Journal, Vol. 370 No. 9590 pp 851-858. (Exhibit 7). e. Gillespie’s ability to perform the kinds of tasks need in this lawsuit, such as reading and handling documents, has declined further since ADA Request No. 6 was initially submitted to the state court in February 2010. Gillespie’s concentration and  short-term memory have declined, and he becomes confused when handling numbers of   physical files and documents. He able to manage PDF files and documents when they are organized and viewable on his computer. The computer screen helps Gillespie maintain his concentration. When he looks away from the computer screen to perform manual tasks, such as looking in a file drawer d rawer for a pleading, he often forgets the purpose of the task. As such, authorization to e-file is a reasonable disability accommodation.

District Clerk Failed to Comply With CM/ECF Administrative Procedures Order  17.

As set set fort forth h in Gill Gillesp espie’ ie’ss lette letterr to Distri District ct Cler Clerk k Sheryl Sheryl L. Loesch Loesch dated dated April April 5, 5,

2012 (Exhibit 8), the Clerk failed to file on PACER Exhibits 1-15 to Gillespie’s Complaint (Doc. 1) in case no. 5:10-cv-503-oc-WTH-DAB. Gillespie provided paper  copies to the Clerk for e-filing as required by CM/ECF Administrative Procedures Order,  No. 6:07-MC-0027-ORL-19: (Exhibit 3) III(C) PRO SE FILER  Unless authorized to file electronically, a pro se filer shall file any pleading and  other paper in paper format. The Clerk will scan and file these papers pape rs electronically and will also maintain a paper file of such documents. However the Clerk failed to comply with the Order which required the Clerk to “scan and  file these papers electronically”. Gillespie notified the District Clerk Loesch of multiple failures by the Clerk, but has not received any response to his letter. (Exhibit 8). Had  Gillespie been authorized to e-file, he could cou ld have corrected these mistakes by the Clerk: THE CLERK FAILED TO PUT VITAL DOCUMENTS ON CM/ECF AND PACER  2. The Cler Clerk k fai faile led d to to put put vita vitall doc docum ument entss I file filed d in in thi thiss cas casee on on the the Case Case Management and Electronic Case Filing (“CM/ECF”) system to view on PACER. One such document is Doc. 2, Exhibits 1-15 to the Complaint (Doc. 1) filed  September 28, 2010 when I personally commenced the case in the Ocala Division and hand-delivered the complaint and exhibits to a deputy clerk. Doc. 2, Exhibit 4 is my Emergency Motion To Disqualify Defendants’ Counsel Ryan Christopher Rodems & Baker, Rodems & Cook, PA submitted July 9, 2010 in the state court action; in this Court the motion is Doc. 2, Exhibit 4 to the Complaint (Doc. 1), but not viewable on PACER. This negatively affected my case because Magistrate Judge David Baker, who is located in Orlando, could not view the document located in Ocala when he made rulings in the case. The document was only viewable in person in Ocala, or by request to send the  physical file to Orlando. There is no evidence that the physical file was sent to Orlando.

I brought this issue to the attention of Chief Judge Anne Conway by letter dated  March 22, 2012, see Doc. 68, Motion To Amend The Judgment, the letter is attached as an exhibit to the motion, and contains 33 pages; a three page letter to Chief Judge Conway and 30 pages of enclosures. PRE-LITIGATION COMMUNICATION WITH JAMES LEANHEART 3. Prio Priorr to to per perso sona nall lly y fil filin ing g thi thiss pro pro se case, case, I wro wrote te Augu August st 30, 2010 2010 to James Leanheart, Court Operations Supervisor, about filing documents o n the CM/ECF system and PACER. This is the operative ope rative language from paragraph five of the accompanying letter: (Exhibit 2) “My…claims…involve documents in the state court record from the Circuit Civil Court of the 13th Judicial Circuit, including…an amended  complaint (150 pages), and an emergency motion to disqualify counsel (190 pages). What is the procedure for including or incorporating these numerous and sometimes large documents into my…civil rights complaint?” Mr. Leanheart did not respond in writing, but we spoke by phone September 10, 2010. Following Mr. Leanheart’s instructions, I filed all the documents in paper  September 28, 2010. I personally filed the case September 28, 2010 and   personally handed the paper documents to a deputy clerk. But the Clerk did not  put any of the exhibits on the CM/ECF system and/or PACER, not the amended  complaint (Exhibit 3), not the emergency motion to disqualify counsel (Exhibit 4), none of the 15 exhibits were put on PACER. I complained to the deputy clerks in Ocala more than once to no avail. I complained in person a number of times and the error was not corrected. I live in Ocala and almost always hand deliver  my documents to a deputy clerk in order to save the cost of postage or courier  service as I am indigent. My letter dated August 30, 2010 to Mr. Leanheart states I planned to file a pro se lawsuit in two weeks or so, but I was delayed until September 28, 2010 due to mental illness and other disabilities, see Doc. Doc . 36 for my notice of filing disability information. INCORRECT DATE/TIME STAMP ON COMPLAINT BY CLERK  8. The Cler Clerk’ k’ss date/ date/ti time me stam stamp p show showss the the Com Compl plai aint nt (Doc. (Doc. 1) was was file filed  d  “2010 SEP 28 AM 7:47” which time is incorrect. The Court does not open until 8:30 AM, and I filed the Complaint myself in person by handing the Complaint directly to a deputy clerk about 8:47 AM.

INCORRECT PLAINITFF ADDRESS BY CLERK OF COURT 9. The Cler Clerk k use used d an an inc incor orre rect ct mail mailin ing g addr addres esss for for me, me, neces necessi sita tati ting ng a corrective motion, see Plaintiff’s Motion to Correct Mailing Address, filed  October 5, 2010. (Doc. 9). My correct address is listed on the complaint and every document filed in this case. My address has not changed since 2005. The motion states as follows: “Plaintiff pro se Gillespie moves Court to correct his mailing address: 1. The Court is sending Plaintiff Gillespie's mail to the wrong address. Please use the correct address, listed on the complaint: 8092 SW I15th Loop, Ocala, Florida 34481.” INCORRECT PLAINITFF PHONE NUMBER BY CLERK OF COURT 10. 10. The Cle Clerk rk use used d an incor incorre rect ct tel teleph ephon onee numbe numberr for for me, me, neces necessi sita tati ting ng a corrective motion, see Plaintiff’s Motion to Correct Phone Nu mber, filed October  13, 2010. (Doc. 15). My correct phone number is listed on the complaint and  every document filed in this case. My home phone number has not changed since 2005. The motion states as follows: “Plaintiff pro se Gillespie moves the Court to correct his p hone number  and states: 1. The PACER docket shows an incorrect phone number for Plaintiff pro se Gillespie. The correct phone number is listed on the complaint: (352) 854-7807.” Gillespie believes the Clerk’s failure to comply with the Court’s CM/ECF Order and scan and file electronically his paper documents is a violation of due process. Other U.S. District Courts Offer Online Pro Se E-filing Registration and Instruction 18.

The Unit United ed State Statess Distr District ict Court Court for for the the North Northern ern Dist Distric rictt of Califo Californi rniaa offer offerss

online e-filing registration instructions for pro se litigants, found at this URL: http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/ECF/proseregistration 1. A computer, the internet, and email on a daily basis so you can e-file your  documents and receive notifications from the Court.

2. A scanner to scan documents that are only in paper pa per format (like exhibits). 3. A printer/copier because each documents that you e-file will also need to be sent to the judge in hard copy (the judge’s copy is called the “chambers copy”). 4. A word-processing program to create your documents. 5. A .pdf reader and a .pdf writer, which enables you to convert word processing documents into .pdf format. Only .pdf documents are accepted for e-filing. Adobe Acrobat is the most common program used. The reader (Adobe Acrobat Reader) is free, but the writer is not. Some word processing programs come with a .pdf  writer already installed. The United States District Court for the Northern District of California offers an online  pro se ECF Registration form in active PDF format. Gillespie PACER Account In Good Standing Since 1999 19.

Gilles Gillespie pie has mainta maintaine ined d a PACER PACER account account in good standi standing ng sinc sincee Decem December ber 22,

1999, thereby demonstrating his ability to competently handle the account. (Exhibit 9). Gillespie meets the technical requirements for e-filing set forth by the U.S. District Court for the N.D. of California shown in paragraph 17, and on the Court’s website. Cost to File Paper Documents in the U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals 20.

Gilles Gillespie pie incurre incurred d time time and and cost costss fili filing ng paper paper documen documents ts in this this Court. Court. The

Eleventh Circuit, located in Atlanta, Georgia, is 376 37 6 miles from Gillespie’s home in Ocala, Florida, according to Google Maps. A round trip is 752 miles. This distance requires Gillespie to submit paper documents to this Court by mail or by courier at considerable expense. There is also a time delay in serving documents by mail or courier, as compared to filing documents personally by hand delivery to the Court.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 NEIL J. GILLESPIE, ESTATE OF PENELOPE GILLESPIE, APPEAL NO.: 12-11213-C Appellants/Plaintiffs, vs.

APPEAL NO.: 12-11028-B

THIRTEENTH JUDICAL CIRCUIT, FLORIDA, et al. Respondents/Defendants.  _______________________________/  ___________________________ ____/ APPENDIX

CONSOLIDATED NOTICE OF PRO SE ELECTRONIC CASE FILING PROHIBITION BY DISTRICT COURT  In support of Disability Accommodation and IFP Fee Waiver 

Exhi Exhibi bitt 1

Case Case Man Manage ageme ment nt/E /Ele lect ctro roni nicc Cas Casee Fil Filin ing g (CM (CM/E /ECF) CF) info inform rmat atio ion n

Exhi Exhibi bitt 2

CM/E CM/ECF CF Admi Admini nist stra rati tive ve Pro Proced cedur ures es Orde Order, r, No. No. 6:0 6:077-MC MC-0 -0027 027-O -ORL RL-1 -19 9

Exhibit 3

Plaintiff’s Motion to File Electronically, Case 5:10-cv-00503 (Doc. 6)

Exhi Exhibi bitt 4

Orde Order, r, Deni Denied ed - Plai Plaint ntif iff’ f’ss Mot Motio ion n to to File File Elec Electr tron onic ical ally ly (Doc. (Doc. 17) 17)

Exhi Exhibi bitt 5

Googl Googlee Maps Maps,, mile mileag agee and and driv drivin ing g time time to to Dist Distri rict ct Cou Court rt,, Ocal Ocalaa Divi Divisi sion on

Exhi Exhibi bitt 6

Reute Reuters rs:: Depr Depres essi sion on more more damagi damaging ng than than some some chron chronic ic illn illnes esse sess

Exhi Exhibi bitt 7

Lance Lancett Med Medic ical al Jour Journal nal,, Vol Vol.. 370 370 No. No. 959 9590 0 pp pp 851 851-8 -858 58,, WHO WHO stud study y

Exhi Exhibi bitt 8

Lett Letter er to Dist Distri rict ct Cler Clerk k Sher Sheryl yl L. Loes Loesch ch,, Apr April il 5, 2012 2012

Exhi Exhibi bitt 9

PACE PACER R wel welcom comee let lette terr to to Gil Gille lesp spie ie,, Dece Decemb mber er 22, 22, 1999 1999 (Red (Redact acted) ed)

Public Access to Court Electronic Records

http://www.pacer.gov/cmecf/

Manage My PACER Account | Manage My Appellate Filer Account | Case Search Sign In

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

E-FILE Appellate Courts District / Bankruptcy Courts CM/ECF Help Desk Numbers Local Court CM/ECF Information CM/ECF FAQs Training Release Notes Resources Developers Manage My Appellate Filer Account

The Case Management/Electronic Case Filing Filing (CM/ECF) system is the Federal Judiciary's comprehensive comprehensive case management management system for all bankruptcy, district and appellate courts. CM/ECF allows courts to accept filings filings and provide access to filed documents over the Internet. CM/ECF keeps out-of-pocket expenses low, gives concurrent access to ca se files by multiple multiple parties, and offers expanded search and reporting capabilities. The system also offers the a bility bility to: immediately update dockets and make them available to users, file pleadings electronically with the court, and download documents and print them directly from the court system. If you already have a filer account and are looking looking for a link to file, check our Court Links page. Links page.

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

1

2

Case 5:10-cv-00503-WTH-DAB 5:10-cv-00503-WT H-DAB Document 6

Filed 10/01/10 Page 1 of 1

3

Case 5:10-cv-00503-WTH-DAB Document 17

Filed 10/14/10 Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT

OF

FLORIDA

OCALA DIVISION

NEIL J. GILLESPIE, Plaintiff, -vs-

Case No. 5:10-cv-503-Oc-10DAB

THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, FLORIDA, et al., Defendants. ______________________________________

ORDER Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Plaintiff’s Motion To File File Electronically (Doc. No. 6). Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, seeks leave to file documents electronically in this action. Pro se litigants, however, are generally not permitted access to the Court’s Case Management and Electronic Case Filing (“CM/ECF”) system unless extenuating circumstances exist. Because Plaintiff has failed failed to state any reason why he needs access to the CM/ECF system, Plaintiff’s Motion To File Electronically (Doc. No. 6) is DENIED. Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time (Doc. No. 14) is GRANTED. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Orlando, Florida on October 14, 2010.

David A. Baker DAVID A. BAKER UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Copies furnished to: Pro Se Plaintiff  Counsel of Record 

4

8092 SW 115th Loop, Loop, Ocala, FL 34481 to 207 NW NW 2nd 2nd St, Ocala, FL 344...

http://m http://maps.goog aps.google.com/m le.com/maps?f=d& aps?f=d&source=s_d& source=s_d&saddr=8092+Sou saddr=8092+South thwest... west...

Directions to 207 NW 2nd St, Ocala, FL 34475 13.9 mi  – about 28 mins

5

8092 SW 115th Loop, Loop, Ocala, FL 34481 to 207 NW 2nd St, St, Ocala, Ocala, FL 344...

http://maps. http://maps.goog google.com/m le.com/maps?f=d& aps?f=d&source=s_d& source=s_d&saddr=8092+Sou saddr=8092+South thwest... west...

8092 SW 115th Loop, Ocala, FL 34481 1. Head west  on SW 115th Loop Restricted usage road

go 79 ft total 79 ft

2. At the the traffic traffic circle, circle, take take the the 1st  exit onto SW 81st Ave Restricted usage road

go 0.2 mi total 0.2 mi

3. Turn Turn left left onto onto 115th St Rd Restricted usage road  About  About 50 secs

go 0.2 mi total 0.4 mi

4. Contin Continue ue onto onto SW 110th St Restricted usage road  About  About 4 mins mins

go 1.2 mi total 1.5 mi

5. Turn Turn right right onto onto Florida 200  About  About 19 mins mins

go 11.6 mi total 13.1 mi

6. Turn Turn left left onto onto S Pine Ave  About  About 3 mins mins

go 0.6 mi total 13.8 mi

7. Turn Turn right right onto onto NW 2nd St Destination will be on the left

go 410 ft total 13.9 mi

207 NW 2nd St, Ocala, FL 34475 These directions are for planning purposes only. You may find that construction projects, traffic, weather, or other events may cause conditions to differ from the map map results, and you should plan plan your route accordingly. You must must obey all signs or notices regarding y our route. r oute. Map data ©2012 Google Directions weren't right? Please find your route on maps.google.com and click "Report a problem" at the bottom left.

Busin Business ess & Fin Financial ancial News, News, Break Breakin ing g US US & Inte Intern rnat ation ional al News | Reu Reute ters.c rs.com om

http://www ttp://www.reu .reute ters.c rs.com om/ass /asset ets/pr s/prin int? t?aid= aid=U USL068 SL068368 368752 752007 007090 09077

» Print

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to colleagues, clients or  customers, use the Reprints tool at the top of any article or visit: www.reutersreprints.com www.reutersreprints.com..

By Michael Kahn LONDON (Reuters) - Depression is more damaging to everyday health than chronic diseases such as angina, arthritis, asthma and diabetes, researchers said on Friday.

Fri, Sep 7 2007

 And if people are ill with other conditions, conditions, depression makes them worse, the researchers found. "We report the largest population-based worldwide study to our knowledge that explores the effect of depression in comparison with four  other chronic diseases on health state," the researchers wrote in the Lancet medical journal. Somnath Chatterji of the World Health Organisation, who led the study, said researchers calculated the impact of different conditions by asking people questions about their capacities to f unction in everyday situations -- such as moving around, seeing things at a distance and remembering information. The researchers assigned a number between 0 and 100 reflecting a person's relative health score. "Our main findings show that depression impairs health state to a substantially greater degree than the other diseases," the researchers wrote. The team used World Health Organisation data collected from 60 countries and more than 240,000 people to show on average between 9 percent and 23 percent had depression in addition to one or more of four other chronic diseases -- asthma, angina, arthritis and diabetes. The most disabling combination was diabetes and depression, the researchers said. "If you live for one year with diabetes and depression together you are living the equivalent of 60 percent of full health," Chatterji said in a telephone interview. The findings show the need to provide better treatment for depression because it has such a big impact on people with chronic illnesses, Chatterji added. "What tends to happen is a health provider doesn't look f or anything else but the chronic illness," he said. "What we are saying is, these people will also be depressed and if you don't manage the depression you can't improve a person's health because depression is actually worsening it."

© Thomson Reuters 2011. All All rights reserved. Users may download and print extracts of content f rom this website for their own personal and non-commercial non-commercial use only. Republication or redistribution of Thomson Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of T homson Reuters. Thomson Reuters and its logo are registered trademarks or  trademarks of the Thomson Reuters group of companies around the world. Thomson Reuters journalists are subject to an Editorial Handbook which requires fair presentation and disclosure of relevant interests. This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to colleagues, clients or  customers, use the Reprints tool at the top of any article or visit: www.reutersreprints.com www.reutersreprints.com..

6

Articles

Depression, chronic diseases, and decrements in health: results from the World Health Surveys Saba Moussavi, Somnath Chatterji, Emese Verdes, Ajay Tandon, Vikram Patel, Bedirhan Ustun

Summary Background  Depression is an important public-health problem, and one of the leading causes of disease burden worldwide. Depression is often comorbid with other chronic diseases and can worsen their associated health outcomes. Few studies have explored the effect of depression, alone or as a comorbidity comorbidity,, on overall health status. Methods The WHO World Health Survey (WHS) studied adults aged 18 years and older to obtain data for health, health-related outcomes, and their determinants. Prevalence of depression in respondents based on ICD-10 criteria was estimated. Prevalence values for four chronic physical diseases—angina, arthritis, asthma, and diabetes—were also estimated using algorithms derived via a Diagnostic Item Probability Study. Mean health scores were constructed using factor analysis and compared across different disease states and demographic variables. The relation of these disease states to mean health scores was determined through regression modelling. Findings Observations were available for 245 404 participants from 60 countries in all regions of the world. Overall, 1-year prevalence for ICD-10 depressive episode alone was 3·2% (95% CI 3·0–3·5); for angina 4·5% (4·3–4·8); for arthritis 4·1% (3·8–4·3); for asthma 3·3% (2·9–3·6); and for diabetes 2·0% (1·8–2·2). An average of between 9·3% and 23·0% of participants with one or more chronic physical disease had comorbid depression. This result was significantly higher than the likelihood of having depression in the absence of a chronic physical disease (p<0·0001). After adjustment for socioeconomic factors and health conditions, depression had the largest effect on worsening mean health scores compared with the other chronic conditions. Consistently across countries and different demographic characteristics, respondents with depression comorbid with one or more chronic diseases had the worst health scores of all the disease states. Interpretation Depression produces the greatest decrement in health compared with the chronic diseases angina, arthritis, asthma, and diabetes. The comorbid state of depression incrementally worsens health compared with depression alone, with any of the chronic diseases alone, and with any combination of chronic diseases without depression. These results indicate the urgency of addressing depression as a public-health priority to reduce disease burden and disability, and to improve the overall health of populations.

Introduction Depression is an important global public-health issue, both because of the relatively high lifetime prevalence ranging from 2% to 15% and because it is associated with substantial disability.1,2 Rated as the fourth leading cause of disease burden in 2000, depression accounted for 4·4% of total disability adjusted life years (DALYs).3 It is also responsible for the greatest proportion of disease burden attributable to non-fatal health outcomes, accounting for almost 12% of total years lived with disability worldwide.1 Without treatment, depression has the tendency to assume a chronic course, be recurrent, and over time to be associated with increasing disability.4,5 The comorbidity of depression with chronic physical diseases such as arthritis and diabetes is well recognised in developed countries.6–9  Several studies have shown that there is an increased risk of having major depression in people with one or more chronic diseases.7,10,11  The degree to which these comorbid states exist at the global level has not been shown. With a growing elderly population, and the associated increase in prevalence of chronic medical conditions, a concomitant rise in the

prevalence of depression is to be expected. In fact, projections indicate that after heart disease, depression is expected to become the second leading cause of disease burden by the year 2020.12 The increasing prevalence of chronic physical diseases and depression leads to the question of how these disorders compare in terms of their effect on overall individual health. The presence of self-reported chronic physical diseases such as angina, arthritis, asthma, and diabetes has been associated with reduced health-related quality of life scores.13–19  Lower health status has been reported in depressed patients than in those without depression, and this state is unequally distributed across population groups. 7,13,20–22  Effects of depressive episodes have also been studied with regard to loss in productivity and poor health-related quality of life. 13,21,23–26 Despite this evidence, depression, like other mental disorders, is often not deemed to be on a par with other chronic physical health conditions in terms of its effe ct on overall health. 27,28  This view is perhaps one of the underlying reasons behind the lack of parity between mental and physical disorders in terms of access to health care.6,29–32 To our knowledge, there has been no worldwide

Lancet 2007; 370: 851–58

See Comment  page 808 Comment page See Perspectives  page 821 Department of Measurement and Health Information Systems, World Health Organization,, Geneva, Organization Switzerland  (S MoussaviMPH, S Chatterji MD, E Verdes PhD, B Ustun MD); MD); Economics and Research Department, Asian Development Developme nt Bank, Manila, Philippines (A Tandon PhD); PhD); and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK (Vikram Patel PhD) Full list of collaborators at end of the paper Correspondence to: Dr Somnath Chatterji, Department of Measurement and Health Information Systems, World Health Organization, Geneva 27, Switzerland [email protected]

7

Articles

comparison of depression with other chronic diseases and their effect, either individually or comorbid, on health. We analysed data from the WHO World Health Survey (WHS) to address the following questions: how does the decrement in health state associated with depression compare with the decrement associated with other common chronic physical conditions; and what is the added effect on decrements in health of suffering from depression, over and above a chronic physical condition?33

Methods Sample Countries from the WHS were selected to represent all regions of the world, with 26 countries from the European region, 15 from the African region, six from the Americas, four from the eastern Mediterranean region, five from the southeast Asia region, and four from the western Pacific region, giving a total of 60 countries. The countries included in the survey programme represent those countries that were willing and able to participate in the survey. Countries with samples that were nationally representative, probabilistically selected, and which had sampling weights information available, were used in the analysis for this paper. To adjust for the population distribution as represented by the UN Stati stical Division and for non-response, post-stratification corrections were made to the sampling weights Procedures All respondents used in the analysis were interviewed with the standardised WHS survey, which included questions on sociodemographic and economic factors, a series of questions on health status, and questions related to whether the individual had ever been diagnosed with depression, asthma, arthritis, angina, and diabetes, whether the person had ever received or was currently on treatment for these conditions, and, with the exception of diabetes, a series of symptom questions related to each condition. All surveys were implemented as face-to-face interviews with the exception of Luxembourg and Israel, which were implemented as telephone interviews. All questionnaires were translated and back-translated using a standard WHO protocol. The quality of translations was independently verified by bilingual experts before field implementation. Informed consent was obtained from all respondents and the study was cleared by the ethics review committees at each site. The health state measure presented in this analysis was developed by WHO based on its it s framework for measuring health. WHO assesses an individual’s state of health as a vector of capacities in multiple domains.34   For measurement in surveys, this information needs to be reduced to a parsimonious set of domains that are cle arly defined and measured with reliable self-report questions. After an extensive review of existing survey questionnaires, questionnaires, none were deemed able to match the exact ideas or have

the information needed to measure the distribution of health in the general population. Hence, a new measure was developed where the valuation could be estimated—ie, the relative disability weight assigned to different patterns of the health states, thus allowing for cross-country comparability. The measure was based on 18 health-related questions, where the responses were recorded on a five point scale ranging from “no diffi culty or problem” proble m” to “extreme difficulty/inability” culty/inability”.. Two of the questions assessed general health: one asking overall self-reported health, and the other asking aski ng how much diffi culty the respondent responde nt had in working or doing household activities during the past 30 days. These two items were analy sed individually. The remaining 16 questions were grouped into the following eight health domains: vision, mobility, self care, cognition, interpersonal activities, pain and discomfort, sleep and energy, and affect. These domains are included in many commonly used health outcome measures such as the Short Form 36 (SF36), the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI 3), and the Euroqol 5D. 35–37 The health measure had been extensively tested as part of a similar survey done between 2000 and 2001, the Multi-Country Survey Study.38  The internal consistency of the health measure as assessed using Cronbach’s alpha was 0·91. The test-retest reliability of individual items, measured by the weighted Kappa, ranged from 0·48–0·62. Missing data for individual items ranged from 1·3% to 5·8%. Construct validity was also assessed, and respondents who were older or had a chronic condition reported worse health, whereas respondents with higher socioeconomic status and countries with higher life expectancies on average reported better health.38 A composite health status score was derived from the 16 self-reported health questions. Since the item responses were based on a five-point ordered categorical scale, a factor analysis using polychoric correlations was done to take into account the covariance structure of the responses to individual questions. The choice of a one factor solution was justified by the high eigenvalue of the first factor (8·79, 74% as a cumulative percentage of the variance explained) and the high communalities of the original variables (between 0·43 and 0·69). We used the principal component method for factor extraction and the regression scoring method to obtain the factor scores. The factor score was transformed to a 0–100 scale, with 0 indicating worst health and 100 indicating best health. To validate the use of symptom questions for diagnosing chronic diseases, WHO implemented in 2003 a diagnostic item probability study in seven countries. Patients were selected from clinics if they were positive for any of the specific disease conditions based on a gold standard diagnostic test, and these patients were considered to be true positives for that particular condition. The patients were then traced back to their homes and asked, for all

Articles

disease conditions, the same symptomatic questions as respondents from the WHS. Additionally, a sample of respondents matched by sex, age, and country of origin was drawn from the WHS if they had negative responses to all the self-reported diagnosis questions for depression, asthma, arthritis, angina, and diabetes. These respondents were considered to be the true negatives for the study. The individual response rates, calculated as the ratio of completed com pleted interviews in selected respondents in the sample, excluding ineligible respondents from the denominator, ranged from 63% in Israel to 99% in the Philippines (detailed response rates available on request). The diagnosis of depression was based on the International Classification of Diseases tenth revision (ICD-10) diagnostic criteria for research for depressive episodes,39 and was derived from an algorithm that took into account respondents reporting symptoms of depression during the past 12 months. The individual questions used to assess these symptoms were based on the World Mental Health Survey version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. I nterview.40 The diagnosis for angina was based on the algorithm derived from the Rose questionnaire. 41 For asthma and arthritis, the sensitivity and specificity of all potential combinations of answers to these symptomatic questions were checked based on responses from the diagnostic item probability study. The combination of answers that produced the best result based on the Receiver Operator Characteristic analysis was used to apply a diagnosis for each respondent in all 60 countries of the WHS sample. Respondents were regarded as positive for diabetes if they reported ever being diagnosed with diabetes. Questions about diabetes were asked in only 46 of the countries that implemented the long version of the questionnaire. All diagnoses of these chronic physical diseases applied to the past 12 months from the date of interview. For most of the analysis, respondents were grouped on the basis of their disease status into one of the following: respondents having none of the aforementioned health conditions, respondents having any of the single conditions alone, respondents having any of the chronic physical diseases alone in conjunction with depression, respondents having two or more comorbidities without depression, and respondents having two or more comorbidities with depression. Analysis The prevalence of each chronic physical disease was estimated,, first alone—ie, without any of the other estimated conditions present—then comorbid with depression but without any additional conditions present, and then two or more comorbid conditions with or without depression. The prevalence of depression in respondents who had any one of the conditions was also estimated. All these estimates were calculated using post-stratified

probability weights. To make valid comparisons across countries, age and sex standardisations were done using WHO’s World Standard Population for age and the UN Statistical Division for sex ratio.42,43 The mean of the health score was calculated using probability weights for the entire sample after stratification by sex, age, education, and income quintile, as well as respondents’ disease status. To test the statistical difference of health scores between each pair of disease groups, a one-way analysis of variance using a Scheffe test was done to adjust for multiple comparisons. Linear regression analysis was used on the pooled dataset of 46 countries to model the relation between respondents’ health state and whether they had depression, a chronic physical disease, or a combination thereof, after controlling for country of origin, sex, age, education, marital status, occupational status, income level, and any interaction between sex with the other demographic variables. To establish whether cultural differences in countries affected the relation between disease state and overall health state, interaction terms between marital status, education, and income quintile with the country variable were included in the model. Responses to some health domains such as sleep and affect are likely to be influenced by whether the respondent is clinically depressed, which could lead to spurious conclusions about the decrements in health associated with depression. To test for this possibility, we did two further analyses. The first analysis explored the association of disease states with each of the two questions of health measure which assess overall health and do not include any symptoms of depression. Second, we used a recursive regression technique to model the effect of depression when the dependent variable, the health score, contained only two domains—mobility and vision. Then, progressively, other domains were added to estimate the health score. The effect of depression on each successive health score was assessed at each marginal addition of a domain by evaluating evalua ting change s in the regression regres sion coeffi cient. This Th is regression analysis was repeated until all eight health domains were include d and their coeffi cients for depression compared. Minimum differences in the coeffi cient for each success successive ive regressi regression on would w ould corroborate the effects of depression on decrements in health as genuine and not the result of a systematic reporting bias. All analysis was coded and done using STATA STA TA version 9.2. 9 .2. Role of the funding source This study was funded by WHO. The sponsor of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report. The corresponding author had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.

Articles

Results The prevalence for depression alone, each chronic disease alone, depression with each chronic physical disease, and having multiple chronic conditions with or without depression for 60 countries was estimated with CIs (results not shown, available on request). At the worldwide level, the prevalence for having any one condition alone did not exceed 5·0%. The prevalence of having diabetes alone had the lowest overall prevalence of 2·0% 2· 0% (1·8–2·2). However, since diabetes prevalence was based on self-report, the role of reporting bias that possibly underestimates the true prevalence cannot be ruled out. Depression alone had the next lowest overall prevalence at 3·2% (3·0–3·5). Asthma alone had an overall prevalence of 3·3% (2·9–3·6), prevalence of arthritis alone was 4·1% (3·8–4·3), and angina alone 4·5% (4·3–4·8). There were variations across countries, but the range of differences in prevalence of any one condition did not exceed eight percentage points. A significant percentage of respondents with any one of the chronic physical conditions also had depression. For respondents with diabetes, at a worldwide level, 9·3% (7·3–11·3) also had depression, 10·7% (9·1–12·3) with arthritis also had depression, 15·0% (12·9–17·2) with angina, and respondents with asthma had the highest prevalence of depression at 18·1% (15·9–20·3). For the 7·1% (6·6–7·6) of respondents who had comorbidity of two or more chronic physical conditions, nearly a quarter (23%) also had depression in addition to their existing comorbid conditions. Thus, the prevalence of depression in respondents with chronic diseases is significantly higher than in respondents without chronic diseases (3·2%, p<0·0001). The figure shows the mean health score and the 95% CIs for each disease. Respondents without any of

100 90·6 90 80

80·3

79·6

79·3

    )     0     0     1   – 70     0     (    e    r 60    o    c    s     h 50     t     l    a    e     h 40    n    a    e     M30

78·9 72·9

67·1

71·8 65·8

65·4 58·5

56·1

20 10 0

  s   s   c   c   a     l   y     l   y     l   y     l   y     l   y   e  s   n  a   o  n    i   t   i   n   n   n   n    i  n   n   i   s   a  n  d   i  c   c    t   i  o   e   t   o  n     h  m     h  r   r  o   o    t     b   n  g    s  o   s   s  o   s   a  o   a  o    t   d   i   n    i   s     a  a     h   r   e   a   o  n   s   i  o   o  n    h  r  o  n  o    i    t     n  n   n     o  o   a   c    i    i    t    i   a   m    i    t   d    o  n   r   d   o   e    i   s    i   g    e   d     h   s   d   c    t     h   s   n   r    t     b   d   d   n    i   e   n    t   e   n     i c  c   c   s   a   o   a   a   r   e   a    A   a    A   a  n    A  r    p  r   m   c  o  n   e   p   o  r   o  n  d    D   i   o  n   o  n   o  n   r  o   o  n    D   r  m   c   s   i  o   o  n    D  e   o  r    i  o   s   i  o     h   s   s   i  o   s   s   c   o   s     e  e   o   s   e   e   e    p  r   o    p  r     T   w    N  o    p  r    p  r    D  e    t   w    D  e    D  e    D  e

Figure: Global mean health by disease status Figure: Global Data from WHS 2003.

the chronic diseases or depression had the highest health score, 90·6—ie, reported having the best health. Respondents with asthma, angina, arthritis, or diabetes alone, had mean health scores of 80·3, 79·6, 79·3, and 78·9, respectively, which were significantly d ifferent from having no disease but not from each other. Respondents with depression had the lowest health score among all the chronic disease conditions, 72·9 (p<0·0001). Respondents who had depression comorbid with another chronic condition had much lower mean health scores than respondents who had the chronic condition alone (p<0·01). For respondents who had two or more chronic conditions excluding depression, their mean health score was 71·8, lower than any of the disease conditions alone but higher than any disease state comorbid with depression. The lowest overall mean health score was for respondents with two or more chronic conditions comorbid with depression (56·1). These results show that comorbid depression is significantly associated with lower health states in respondents with chronic conditions in comparison to having chronic conditions, including multiple chronic conditions, without depression (p<0·0001). We examined mean health scores by disease state in more detail by looking across sociodemographic variables (results not shown). The patterns are consistent, and for depression alone the mean health score is lower than for other chronic conditions alone, across all socioeconomic variables. For all comorbid depression, the mean health score is lower across all socioeconomic variables than for any of the chronic conditions alone or for depression alone. Thus, having depression comorbid with another chronic physical disease lowers health status substantially, irrespective of a respondent’s age, sex, and other demographic variables. The coeffi cients of a regression model in the table summarises the relation between overall health and the different disease states and the sociodemographic determinants of sex, age, education, employment status, income quintile, and marital status. We also controlled for country of residence, interaction of country with education, martial status and income quintile, and interaction of sex with education, employment status, and income quintile (results not shown). The results from the model indicate that lower coeffi cient values are associated ass ociated with lower lo wer health hea lth scores. Results of the model show that being older is indicative of decreased health status, as is having less education, having lower income, and being unemployed. Women had a lower overall health score, and the decrements in health were greater for women who were unemployed, less educated, or widowed as indicated by the significant signifi cant coeffi cients for the t he interaction intera ction terms te rms of sex with these demographic variables (results not shown). There does not seem to be a significant difference in health status between being married and

Articles

Independent variables

Coefficients (standard error)

Sex (reference category=men) Women

–2·03 (0·07)*

Age group (reference category=15–19 year olds) 30–44

–2·20 (0·09)*

45–59

–5·58 (0·11)*

60–69

–9·78 (0·14)*

70–79

–15·30 (0·18)*

8 0+

–22·19 (0·27)*

Marital status (reference category=married) Never married

0·02 (0·1)

Cohabitating

–0·20 (0·19)

Separated, divorced, or widowed

–1·93 (0·11)*

Education (reference category=no school) Less than primary

0·88 (0·12)*

Primary completed

1·77 (0·12)*

Secondary completed

2·20 (0·13)*

Greater than secondary

2·69 (0·14)*

Employment status (reference=unemployed) Currently employed

1·77 (0·08)*

Income quintiles (reference category=lowest quintile) Second quintile

0·77 (0·10)*

Third quintile

1·18 (0·11)*

Fourth quintile

1·73 (0·11)*

Highest quintile

2·41 (0·12)*

Disease status (reference=no health conditions) Depression alone

–13·89 (0·20)*

Angina alone

–6·68 (0·17)*

Arthritis alone

–5·92 (0·16)*

Asthma alone

–6·54 (0·15)*

Diabetes

–3·53 (0·26)*

Depression+angina

–20·47 (0·42)*

Depression+arthritis

–16·77 (0·46)*

Depression+asthma

–19·44 (0·39)*

Depression+diabetes

–23·43 (0·86)*

More than one chronic condition without depression

–11·97 (0·16)*

Depre Dep ress ssio ion n with with more more than than one one chro chronic nic con condi diti tion on Total number of respondents

–24· –2 4·38 38 (0· (0·31 31)* )* 142 755

Coefficients for country and so ciodemographic interacti ons not shown. *p<0·01.

Table: Regression Table:  Regression results for overall health

never having been married or cohabitating. However, being separated, divorced, or widowed is associated with lower health scores. Overall, disease status has a greater association with reported health scores than do sociodemographic characteristics. Controlling for all other factors, having depression is associated with the lowest health scores, either alone or comorbid with other chronic diseasess (p<0·0001). disease (p<0·00 01). The c oefficient values va lues from the model show that the comorbid state of depression with

diabetes causes even greater decrements in health than the addition of the two conditions separately. This finding is suggestive of an interactive effect between depression and diabetes that causes an extra negative effect on health beyond the simple addition of each of the two conditions. Having more than two chronic disease s without depressi depression on (coeffi cient –11·97), although associated with a lower health score than having any one chronic disease, has much less of a negative association with health than does having depression depress ion alone (coeffi cient –13·89 –13·89), ), or depression de pression comorbid with wi th one of the chronic dise ases (coeffi cients range from –16·77 to –23·43). Respondents with two or more chronic diseases in addition to having depression had the lowest health scores of all the disease groups (coeffi cient –24·38) –24·38).. Interacting sociodemographic variables with the country variable did not show statistically significant change the coefficients of depression and comorbid depression in the model, which suggests that cultural differences across countries and their interaction with sociodemographic characteristics does not affect the influence of depression on overall health. To rule out the effects of depression on some of the health domains included in the health measure, we compared the mean scores by disease status for the two general questions on overall self-rated health and difficulties with work and activities activi ties (results not shown). Although Althou gh the scores for the diffi culti culties es with wi th work wor k question were higher than the overall health question, the pattern across disease states for both questions was quite similar to the pattern seen for the overall mean health score. Respondents who reported no chronic conditions had the highest scores, respondents with depression alone or comorbid with another condition had the lowest scores overall. Even respondents with two or more chronic conditions but no depression scored higher than any respondent with depression alone or comorbid with another condition. We also did a recursive regression as described in the methods section (result ( resultss not shown). The coeffi cient for depression in the model with the least-related of the health domains, vision and mobility, had a value of –9·9. Adding a thi rd domain, do main, pain, the coeffi cient for depression rose slightly to –13·6. With each successive additi on of a health domain, d omain, the th e coeffi cient doe s not exceed –13·9. The addition of more domains—even those that are likely to be most responsive to the presence of depression such as sleep or energy and affect—did not have an appreciable addition on the average effect of depression on health status. The coeffi cient remain remainss fairly fairl y stable stabl e irrespecti irre spective ve of t he composition of domains that underlie the computation of the health score. These analyses show that our findings are unlikely to indicate a bias due to inclusion of items in the overall health status score that are related to depression.

Articles

Discussion The worldwide prevalence of depression, asthma, angina, arthritis, and diabetes based on data collected in the World Health Surveys, and used in the analysis presented here, are similar to the data reported by WHO’s Global Burden of Disease study stud y.44  The data show that comorbidity between chronic physical conditions and depression is common, and that people with chronic diseases are significantly more likely to suffer from depression than those without (p<0.0001). Our data indicate that depression is associated with a decrement in health that is significantly greater than those associated with the other chronic diseases in this study. Though depression has previously been shown to be associated with disability and declines in health-related quality of life, this is the largest scale study to our knowledge that shows this decline using direct comparisons across physical conditions in multiple countries with a common measurement strategy. Furthermore, we have also shown that depression comorbid with other chronic diseases produced significantly greater decrements in health than from one or more chronic diseases, and that this additive effect is substantially amplified in the case of depression comorbid with diabetes. These associations remained evident after adjustment for sociodemographic, country of origin, and economic factors. Our findings are consistent with earlier studies that have shown a high degree of association between depression and disability.45  There are, however, few studies that have compared the effect of depression with other chronic diseases. One reason for our findings could be that depression is associated specifically with decrements in mental domains of health, which were included in the composite health score we computed for our analyses. However, in the recursive regression analysis, we showed that adding each health domain serially does not alter the substantive results, since the size of the depression regression coefficient is barely changed. This finding confirms that the measure is not biased towards depression. Another reason for our findings might be that depression is associated with a negative assessment of functioning in all domains and therefore what one is measuring is merely a negative frame of mind that leads to reporting biases. An illustration of such a response bias is shown in the study by Owsely and colleagues,46  who assessed the effect of depression in elderly individuals on their response to a vision questionnaire. After controlling for demographics, general health, and vision, depression was found to be associated with reduced scores on the questionnaire, suggesting negative reporting as a function of being depressed rather than actual vision ability. To address this bias, the WHS also included vignettes in the survey whereby each respondent was presented with a set of brief descriptions of individuals in a fixed level of health for a particular domain. Five vignettes per domain were presented ranging, for example, from quadriplegia at one

extreme of mobility, to a marathon runner at the other extreme. Respondents were asked how they would rate their diffi culty in that particular domain if they were the person described in each of the vignettes. The examination of these rating patterns show that respondents with and without depression showed the same pattern of rating, even though they differed in self-report of their own experiences in each domain. This finding suggests that depressed respondents were not reporting things more negatively for the same level of health, and further supports the absence of biased reporting due to depression (results not shown). Our vignette method was possibly not suffi ciently sensitive in detecting systematic reporting biases: though we do not believe this to be the case, this possibility needs to be investigated in future studies. Additionally, the reporting of depressive symptoms or diagnosis could vary between countries because of cultural differences in reporting such symptoms. If respondents in some countries underreported their depressive symptoms, leading to an underestimate of the prevalence of depression in these countries, and if this was associated with denial of health problems, it would in fact narrow the difference in the reported decrements in health between those with and without depression. Our results show this situation was not the case, that even after controlling for country effects, the decrements in health due to depression, both in pure and comorbid states, continue to remain significant. So if underestimating of depression prevalence is occurring, it actually strengthens the findings that depression increases decrements in health. Thus, these reporting biases, if they exist, do not detract from our substantive findings. The WHS was a cross-sectional study and did not include questions on onset and duration of illness, fluctuations in course and details of health-care use such as number and timing of contacts with health-care services, the reasons for contact, and the outcome following contact. Hence, we cannot establish what burden depression, and its comorbidity with other chronic diseases, places on the health system, how depression can modify the course of these disorders, and whether treatment of depression when present with these chronic physical diseases would alter their course. For the estimation of prevalence, the algorithms for the chronic physical conditions were based on a small validation study in a few countries that used negatives drawn from respondents in the WHS who self-reported no chronic diseases. Since these conditions are known to have an average prevalence in the general population of around 5%, the likelihood of these true negative respondents having any one of the above diagnoses is low.. Both depression and angina were based on validated low algorithms, but the algorithms of asthma and arthritis could benefit from a more comprehensive validation study, since the presence of some false negative respondents cannot be ruled out. The algorithms might

Articles

need to be modified if larger validation studies are done in more countries and if the true negatives were also identified on a gold standard test. Diabetes was based on self-report, and the role of reporting bias on the prevalence presented in our study is noted. However, we do not think that the possibility of a small misclassification bias would substantially alter the core message of this study that being sad is bad for one’s health. In conclusion, we report the largest population-based worldwide study to our knowledge that explores the effect of depression in comparison with four other chronic diseases on health state. Our main findings show that depression impairs health state to a substantially greater degree than the other diseases. A significant percentage of respondents have depression in addition to their existing chronic physical conditions, a group that is often unrecognised and untreated.29,47,48 This finding is of special importance, considering the presence of depression and its treatment is clearly relat ed to the outcome of these chronic diseases. 7,48–50 Comorbidity with depression significantly worsens the health state of people with chronic diseases. The need for timely diagnosis and treatment of depressive disorders to reduce the burden on public health is imperative. In many primary care settings, patients presenting with multiple disorders that include depression often don’t get diagnosed, and if they do, often treatment is focused towards the other chronic diseases.6  Depression can be treated in primary care or community settings with locally available cost-effective interventions.3,51  On the basis of our results, addressing the further exacerbation of disability due to depression needs to be a priority of health systems worldwide. Primary care providers must be taught not to ignore the presence of depression when patients present with a chronic physical condition, in view of the marked effect that it has on an individual’s health. This goal can be accomplished in part by sending a message which, in addition to reducing the stigma surrounding mental illness, can alert providers and the public at large that depression is a disease at least on a par with physical chronic diseases in damaging health.

AMRO/PAHO—Célia Landmann Szwarcwald (Brazil), Maritza Molina AMRO/PAHO—Célia Achécar (Dominican Republic), Fernando Sacoto (Ecuador), Tim Farrell (Guatemala), G Olaiz Fernández (Mexico), M W Torres Numbay (Paraguay), Jorge Agulla (Uruguay). EMRO—Mustapha Azelmat (Morocco), Ashfaq Ahmed (Pakistan), Nourredine Achour (Tunisia), (Tunisia), Gohar Wajid (United Arab Emirates), Christine Kotarakos (INRA-ECO EU surveys), Aida Pilav (Bosnia and Herzegovina), Marijan Erceg (Croatia), Vlasta Mazankova (Czech Republic), Andrus Saar (Estonia), Roman R.Shakarishvili (Georgia), Jozsef Vitrai (Hungary), Bruce Rosen (Israel), Maksut Karimovich Kulzhanov (Kazakhstan), Ineta Pirkitna (Latvia), Jorun Ramm (Norway), Tamara Tamara Maximomva (Russian Federation), Maria Letkovicova (Slovakia), Tit Albreht (Slovenia), Rosa Mataix (Spain), Adnan Kisa (Turkey), Volodimir Olexandrovich Kolodenko (Ukraine) SEARO—P Arokiasamy (India), Kyi Soe (Myanmar), Sanjoy Nandy (Nepal), Thushara Fernando (Sri Lanka) WPRO—Russell Blamey (Australia), Keqin Rao (China), Buongnong Boupha (Laos Peoples’ Democratic Republic), Maimunah A Hamid (Malaysia), Laurie Ramiro (Philippines), Duong Huy Lieu (Vietnam).

Contributors

13

SM, SC, and TBU contributed to the design of the study. SM, SC, EV EV,, AT, AT, and VP contributed to the analyses. All authors were involved in the development of the manuscript and approved the final version. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views or policies of the Asian Development Bank or the World Health Organization.

14

References

1

2

3

4 5 6 7

8

9

10 11

12

15

Conflict of interest statement

We declare that we have no conflict of interest. Acknowledgments

AFRO—Blaise Sondo (Burkina Faso), Djona Avoc Avocksouma ksouma (Chad), Sitti Djaouharia Chihabiddine (Comores), Georges Moyen (Congo, Brazzaville), M Seka Monney Firmin (Cote D’Ivoire), Makonnen Asefa (Ethiopia), Richard Biritwum (Ghana), Fredrick Otieno (Kenya), Sidon Konyani (Malawi), Mamadou Basséry Ballo (Mali), Maye Mint Haidy (Mauritania), P Burhoo (Mauritius), M Zauana (Namibia), Babacar Drame (Senegal), Zaid Kimmie (South Africa), Isabel Thembi Zwane (Swaziland), Musonda Lemba (Zambia), Julita Maradzika (Zimbabwe)

16

17

18

Ustun TB, Chatterji S. Global burden of depressive disorders and future projections. In: Dawson A, Tylee A, eds. Depression: social and economic timebomb. London: BMJ Books, 2001. Ustun TB, TB, Ayuso–Mateos Ayuso–Mateos JL, Chatterji S, Mathers Mathers C, Murray Murray CJ. Global burden of depressive disorders in the year 2000. Br J Psychiatry  2004;  2004; 184: 184: 386–92.  386–92. Hyman S, Chisolm D, Kessler R, Patel Patel V, V, Whiteford H. Mental Mental Disorders. In: Jamison DT, Mosley WH, Bobadilla JL , Measham AR, eds. Disease control priorities in developing countries, 2nd edn. New York: Oxford University Press; 2006. Solomon DA, Keller Keller MB, MB, Leon AC, et et al. Multiple recurrences of major depressive disorder. Am J Psychiatry  2000;  2000; 157: 157: 229–33.  229–33. Andrews G. Should depression depression be managed as a chronic disease? disease? BMJ  2001;  2001; 322: 322: 419–21.  419–21. Cassano P, Fava Fava M. Depression and public health: an overview overview..  J Psychosom Res 2002; Res 2002; 53: 53: 849–57.  849–57. Noel PH, Williams Williams JW Jr, Unutzer J, et al. Depression Depression and comorbid illness in elderly primary care patients: impact on multiple domains of health status and well-being. Ann Fam Med 2004; 2: 2: 555–62.  555–62. Cassileth BR, Lusk Lusk EJ, Strouse TB, et al. Psychosocial status in chronic illness. A comparative analysis of six diagnostic groups. N Engl J Med  1984;  1984; 311: 311: 506–11.  506–11. Chapman DP, Perry GS, Strine TW. The vital link between chronic disease and depressive disorders. Prev Chronic Dis 2005; Dis 2005; 2: A14. 2:  A14. Katon W, W, Schulberg H. Epidemiology of depression depression in primary care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry  1992;  1992; 14: 14: 237–47.  237–47. Harpole LH, Williams JW Jr, Jr, Olsen MK, et al. Improving depression outcomes in older adults with comorbid medical illness. Gen Hosp Psychiatry  2005;  2005; 27: 27: 4–12.  4–12. Summary: the global burden of disease. Boston: Harvard School of Public Health, 1996. Strine TW, TW, Chapman DP, Kobau R, Balluz L, Mokdad AH. Depression, anxiety, and physical impairments and quality of life in the US noninstitutionalized population. Psychiatr Serv  2004;  2004; 55: 1408–13. Ciechanowski PS, Katon WJ, Russo JE. Depression Depression and diabetes: impact of depressive symptoms on adherence, function, and costs. Arch Intern Med  2000;  2000; 160: 160: 3278–85.  3278–85. Alonso J, Ferrer M, Gandek B, et al. Health–related quality of life associated with chronic conditions in eight countries: results from the International Quality of Life Assessment (IQOLA) Project. Qual Life Res 2004; Res 2004; 13: 13: 283–98.  283–98. Bayliss EA, Ellis JL, Steiner JF. Subjective assessments of comorbidity correlate with quality of life health outcomes: initial validation of a comorbidity assessment instrument. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2005; Outcomes 2005; 3: 51. Fortin M, Lapointe L, Hudon C, Vanasse A, Ntetu AL, Maltais D. Multimorbidity and quality of life in primary care: a systematic review. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2004;  51. Outcomes 2004; 2: 2: 51. Fortin M, Bravo G, Hudon C, et al. Relationship between between multimorbidity and health-related quality of life of patients in primary care. Qual Life Res 2006; Res 2006; 15: 15: 83–91.  83–91.

Articles

19 20

21

22

23

24 25

26

27

28

29 30

31

32

33

34

35

Goodwin RD, RD, Olfson M, Shea S, et al. Asthma and mental disorders in primary care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry  2003;  2003; 25: 25: 479–83.  479–83. Kosloski K, Stull DE, Kercher Kercher K, Van Dussen DJ. Longitudinal analysis of the reciprocal effects of self-assessed global health and depressive symptoms. J symptoms.  J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2005; Sci 2005; 60: 296–303. Katon W, W, Sullivan M, Russo J, Dobie R, Sakai C. Depressive Depressive symptoms and measures of disability: a prospective study.  J Affect Disord  1993;  1993; 27: 27: 245–54.  245–54. Isacson D, Bingefors K, von Knorring L. The impact of depression is unevenly distributed in the population. Eur Psychiatry  2005;  2005; 20: 205–12. Arnow BA, Hunkeler Hunkeler EM, Blasey Blasey CM, et et al. Comorbid depression, chronic pain, and disability in primary care. Psychosom Med  2006;  2006; 68: 262–68. 68:  262–68. Egede LE. Diabetes, major depression, depression, and functional disability among US adults. Diabetes Care 2004; Care 2004; 27: 27: 421–28.  421–28. Simon GE, Chisholm D, Treglia M, Bushnell Bushnell D. Course Course of depression, health services costs, and work productivity in an international primary care study. study.Gen Gen Hosp Psychiatry  2002;  2002; 24: 328–35. Simon GE, Revicki D, D, Heiligenstein Heiligenstein J, et al. Recovery from depression, work productivity, and health care costs among primary care patients. Gen Hosp Psychiatry  2000;  2000; 22: 22: 153–62.  153–62. Wang JJ. Prevalence and correlates of depressive depressive symptoms symptoms in the elderly of rural communities in southern Taiwan. J Taiwan. J Nurs Res 2001; Res 2001; 9: 1–12. Herrman H, H, Patrick DL, Diehr P, et al. Longitudinal investigation investigation of depression outcomes in primary care in six countries: the LIDO study. Functional Functional status, health service use and treatment of people with depressive symptoms. Psychol Med  2002;  2002; 32:  889–902. 32: 889–902. Andrews G. Should depression be managed as a chronic chronic disease?  2001; 322:  419–21. BMJ  2001; 322: 419–21. Bogner HR, Cary MS, Bruce ML, et al. The The role of medical comorbidity in outcome of major depression in primary care: the PROSPECT study. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry  2005;  2005; 13: 13: 861–68.  861–68. Chisholm D, Diehr Diehr P, Knapp M, Patrick D, Treglia Treglia M, Simon Simon G. Depression status, medical comorbidity and resource costs. Evidence from an international study of major depression in primary care (LIDO). Br J Psychiatry  2003;  2003; 183: 183: 121–31.  121–31. Katon W, W, Von Korff M, Lin E, et al. Improving primary care treatment of depression among patients with diabetes mellitus: the design of the pathways study. Gen Hosp Psychiatry  2003;  2003; 25: 158–68. Ustun TB, Chatterji S, Mechabal A, Murray CJL, CJL, WHS Collaborating Groups. The World Health Surveys in health systems performance assessment: debates, methods, and empericism. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003. Salomon JA, Mathers CD, CD, Chatterji S, Sadana R, Ustun TB, Murray CJL. Quantifying individual levels of health: definitions, concepts and measurement issues. In: Murray CJL, Evans D, eds. Health systems performance assessment: debates, methods and empericism. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2003. Furlong WJ, Feeny Feeny DH, Torrance Torrance GW, GW, Barr RD. The Health Health Utilities Index (HUI) system for assessing health-related quality of life in clinical studies. Ann Med  2001;  2001; 33: 375–84.

36 Ware J Jr, Jr, Kosinski M, Keller Keller SD. A 12-Item 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care 1996; Care 1996; 34: 34: 220–33.  220–33. 37 Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: EQ-5D: a measure measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med  2001;  2001; 33: 33: 337–43.  337–43. 38 Ustun TB, Chatterji S, Villanueva M, et al. WHO WHO Multi-country Multi-country survey study on health and responsiveness 2000–2001. 2000–2001. In: Murray CJL, Evans D, eds. Health Systems Performance Assessment: Assessment: Debates, Methods and Empericism. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2003. 39 WHO. The ICD-10 classification of mental and behavioural disorders: diagnostic criteria for research (DCR-10). Geneva: World World Health Organization, 1993. 40 Kessler RC, RC, Ustun TB. The World World Mental Health Health (WMH) Survey Survey Initiative Version of the World Health Organization (WHO) Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). Int J Methods Psychiatr Res 2004; Res 2004; 13: 13: 93–121.  93–121. 41 Rose GA. The diagnosis of of ischaemic heart pain and intermittent claudication in field surveys. Bull World Health Organ 1962; Organ 1962; 27: 645–58. 42 Ahmad OB, Boschi-Pint C, Lopez AD, Murray Murray CJL, Lozano R, Inoue M. Age Standardization of Rates: a new WHO standard. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2001. 43 United Nations Nations Population Population Division. Division. World World population prospects: the 2000 revision. New York: United Nations, 2000. 44 Mathers CD LAMC. LAMC. The burden of disease and mortality by condition: data, methods and results for 2001. In: Lopez AD MCEMMCJD, ed. Global burden of disease and risk factors. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001: 45–240. 45 Ormel J, Kempen GI, Deeg DJ, Brilman EI, van Sonderen E, Relyveld J. Functioning, well-being, and health perception in late middle-aged and older people: comparing the effects of depressive symptoms and chronic medical conditions. J conditions. J Am Geriatr Soc  1998; 46: 39–48. 46:  39–48. 46 Owsley C, McGwin G Jr. Jr. Depression Depression and the 25-item 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire in older adults. Ophthalmology  2004;  2004; 111: 111: 2259–64.  2259–64. 47 Luber MP, Hollenberg JP, Williams-Russo Williams-Russo P, et al. Diagnosis, Diagnosis, treatment, comorbidity, and resource utilization of depressed patients in a general medical practice. Int J Psychiatry Med  2000;  2000; 30: 1–13. 48 Theme-Filha MM, Szwarcwald CL, Souza-Junior Souza-Junior PR. Socio-demographic characteristics, treatment coverage, and self-rated health of individuals who reported six chronic diseases in Brazil, 2003. Cad Saude Publica 2005; Publica 2005; 21 21 (suppl)  (suppl):: 43–53. 49 Lin EH, Katon W, Rutter C, et al. Effects of enhanced enhanced depression treatment on diabetes self-care. Ann Fam Med  2006;  2006; 4: 4: 46–53.  46–53. 50 Katon W, W, Von Korff M, Lin E, et al. Improving primary care treatment of depression among patients with diabetes mellitus: the design of the pathways study study.. Gen Hosp Psychiatry  2003;  2003; 25: 25: 158–68.  158–68. 51 Patel V, V, Araya R, Bolton P. Treating Treating Depression Depression in the developing world. Trop Med Int Health 2004; Health 2004; 9: 9: 539–41.  539–41.

VIA USPS CERTIFIED MAIL, RRR Article No.: 7010 1670 0001 9008 0291

April 5, 2012

Ms. Sheryl L. Loesch, Clerk of Court U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida 401 West Central Boulevard, Suite 1200 Orlando, Florida 32801-0120 RE: Gillespie v. Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, FL, et al, Case No.: 5:10-cv-00503-Oc-10TBS Dear Ms. Loesch: This letter concerns a number of apparent failures by the Clerk in the above captioned case. In addition, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida does not appear to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. (ADA). Some issues beyond the Clerk’s authority are  presented in this letter for context. My experience in this case would cause a reasonable person to question the fairness and  impartiality of this Clerk and Court. See Plaintiff’s Response to Order to Show Cause (Doc. 58). As set forth in the Complaint (Doc. 1), this lawsuit is about the misuse and denial of judicial  process under the color of law in the Florida state court action Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA, et al, case no. 05-CA-007205, Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Florida. The state court denied me the right to lawfully adjudicate ad judicate my case due to the conflict of interest of attorney Ryan Christopher Rodems who unlawfully represented his firm, Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA, against me, a former client, on the same matter as the prior representation, the Amscot lawsuit. This District Court has continued the misuse and denial of judicial process under the color of law when it failed, among other things, to disqualify Mr. Rodems in this action pursuant to the holding of McPartland v. ISI Inv. Services, Inc., 890 F.Supp. 1029, M.D.Fla., 1995. (Doc. 20). McPartland has been a mandatory man datory authority on disqualification in the Middle District of Florida since entered June 30, 1995 by Judge Kovachevich. The state court action turned into a personal vendetta for Mr. Rodems on January 19, 2006 when he commenced a vexatious libel counterclaim against me, which continued through September  28, 2010 whereupon Rodems voluntarily dismissed the case without prejudice. Since March 3, 2006 Mr. Rodems directed, with malice aforethought, a course of harassing conduct toward me that has aggravated my disability, caused substantial emotional distress and  served no legitimate purpose. (Doc. 36). Mr. Rodems’ unprofessional conduct is apparent in his letter to me dated December 13, 2006, copy enclosed. (Exhibit 1). For example: “I recognize that you are a bitter man who apparently has been victimized by your own  poor choices in life. You also claim to have mental or psychological problems, of which I have never seen documentation. However, your behavior in this case has been so abnormal that I would not disagree with your assertions of mental problems.” (P1, ¶3)

8

Ms. Sheryl L. Loesch, Clerk of Court U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida

Page - 2 April 5, 2012

“So, in addition to your case's lack of merit, you are cheap and not willing to pay the required hourly rates for representation.” (P3, ¶2). Mr. Rodems prevented the lawful adjudication of both the state and federal cases through his repeated violation of FL Bar Rule 4-3.3 Candor Toward The Tribunal. (Exhibit 1). Mr. Rodems made numerous false statements of material fact to the tribunal, failed to cooperate with opposing counsel, and disrupted the tribunal for strategic advantage. Mr. Rodems failed to disclose to the court legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing opp osing counsel. (Exhibit 1). As set forth in my Petition (SC11-1622) to the Florida Supreme Court (Doc. 62), Mr. Rodems made false statements to the tribunal to have an arrest warrant issued for me for the purpose of  forcing a walk-away settlement agreement in the state court case, and to force a walk-away settlement agreement in this Court for my federal civil rights and ADA disability lawsuit. CASE MANAGEMENT

1. Pursu Pursuan antt to Local Local Rule Rule 3.05 3.05,, the the Cler Clerk k desi design gnat ated ed thi thiss acti action on as as a Tra Track ck Two Two Cas Casee September 30, 2010 for case management purposes. Upon information and belief, this case is a Track Three Case pursuant to Local Rule 3.05, complex litigation as set forth in Plaintiff’s Response To Order To Show Cause (Doc. 58); see paragraph six (6) below, and paragraph twenty-two (22), which is too large to cite here. “6. For case management purposes under Local Rule 3.05, Plaintiff believes this action is a complex litigation case due to the nature of the allegations against a Florida Circuit Court, three circuit court judges, court counsel, the ADA coordinator, the law firm that gives rise to the action, and the attorney and firm hired to represent, and later   betrayed, the plaintiff. The Plaintiff, an indigent, disabled, unrepresented, nonlawyer, appearing pro se, alleges misuse and denial of judicial process under the color of law, violation of his Civil Rights, and the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). Counsel of  record Ryan Christopher Rodems, a one-time on e-time defendant himself in this case, made the action impossibly complex by intentionally misleading this Court with false a nd untrue statements in his pleadings, in violation of Rule 11(b), FRCP.” THE CLERK FAILED TO PUT VITAL DOCUMENTS ON CM/ECF AND PACER

2. The Cler Clerk k fail failed ed to to put put vita vitall docu docume ment ntss I fil filed ed in in this this cas casee on the the Cas Casee Manag Managem emen entt and  and  Electronic Case Filing (“CM/ECF”) system to view on PACER. One such document is Doc. 2, Exhibits 1-15 to the Complaint (Doc. 1) filed September 28, 2010 when I personally commenced  the case in the Ocala Division and hand-delivered the complaint and exhibits to a deputy clerk. Doc. 2, Exhibit 4 is my Emergency Motion To Disqualify Defendants’ Counsel Ryan Christopher Rodems & Baker, Rodems & Cook , PA submitted July 9, 2010 in the state court action; in this Court the motion is Doc. 2, Exhibit 4 to the Complaint (Doc. 1), but not viewable on PACER. This negatively affected my case because Magistrate Judge David Baker, who is

Ms. Sheryl L. Loesch, Clerk of Court U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida

Page - 3 April 5, 2012

located in Orlando, could not view the document located in Ocala when he made rulings in the case. The document was only viewable in person in Ocala, or by request to send the physical file to Orlando. There is no evidence that the physical file was sent to Orlando. I brought this issue to the attention of Chief Judge Anne Conway by letter dated March 22, 2012, see Doc. 68, Motion To Amend The Judgment, the letter is attached as an exhibit to the motion, and contains 33 pages; a three page letter to Chief Judge Conway and 30 pages of enclosures. PRE-LITIGATION COMMUNICATION WITH JAMES LEANHEART

3. Prio Priorr to perso persona nall lly y fili filing ng thi thiss pro pro se cas case, e, I wro wrote te Augu August st 30, 30, 201 2010 0 to Jam James es Lea Leanhe nhear art, t, Court Operations Supervisor, about filing documents on the CM/ECF system and PACER. This is the operative language from paragraph five of the accompanying letter: (Exhibit 2) “My…claims…involve documents in the state court record from the Circuit Civil Court of the 13th Judicial Circuit, including…an amended complaint (150 pages), and an emergency motion to disqualify counsel (190 pages). What is the procedure for including or incorporating these numerous and sometimes large documents into my…civil rights complaint?” Mr. Leanheart did not respond in writing, but we spoke by phone September 10, 2010. Following Mr. Leanheart’s instructions, I filed all the documents in paper September 28, 2010. I personally filed the case September 28, 2010 and personally handed the paper documents to a deputy clerk. But the Clerk did not put any of the exhibits on the CM/ECF system and/or PACER, not the amended complaint (Exhibit 3), not the emergency motion to disqualify counsel (Exhibit 4), none of the 15 exhibits were put on PACER. I complained to the deputy clerks in Ocala more than once to no avail. I complained in person a number of times and the error was not corrected. I live in Ocala and almost always hand deliver my documents to a deputy clerk in order to save the cost of postage or courier service as I am indigent. My letter dated August 30, 2010 to Mr. Leanheart states I planned to file a pro se lawsuit in two weeks or so, but I was delayed until September 28, 2010 due to mental illness and other  disabilities, see Doc. 36 for my notice of filing disability information. NO ADA ACCOMMODATION IN THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

4. I prov provid ided ed the the Cou Court rt a comp compre rehe hens nsiv ivee ADA ADA fil filee on the the morn mornin ing g of Sept Septem ember ber 28, 2010 2010 when I personally filed the lawsuit. I believe Mr. Leanheart was present along with a number of  deputy clerks and perhaps other court personnel. I was assured that the judge in the case would  consider my ADA accommodation request and an d medical report by Dr. Karin Huffer. I was told  there was nothing else to do. It appears that the Middle District of Florida does not have an ADA coordinator, and does not  provide an ADA form to make an accommodation request as is the practice in state court.

Ms. Sheryl L. Loesch, Clerk of Court U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida

Page - 4 April 5, 2012

Furthermore, the website of the Middle District of Florida does n ot mention the ADA or how to request a disability accommodation. Among other things, I need to e-file, see below. My state court ADA file requested designation as c omplex litigation, case management by the court, protection from harassment (psychological torture) and perjury, and to follow the holding of Haines v. Kerner   , 404 U.S. 520 (1971), where the U.S. Supreme Court found pro se pleadings se pleadings should be held to "less stringent standards" than those drafted by attorneys. And I requested  reque sted  intensive case management of the kind advocated for by the Hon. Claudia Rickert Isom, in her  law review Professionalism and Litigation Ethics, 28 STETSON L. REV. 323, 324 (1998). Judge Isom is also a defendant in this case. When a litigant’s health is at risk, an opinion decided March 27, 2012 by Judge Richard Posner  of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (Chicago) in a civil rights suit brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suggested appointment of counsel because withholding nutritious food would violate the Eighth Amendment. This is what happened in my state court action June 21, 2011, see Doc. 33, Doc. 39, Doc. 47, Doc. 61, Doc. 62. In related case 5:11-cv-00539, see First Amended  Complaint, Doc. 15, paragraph 16: “16. Gillespie is an individual individual with with mental illness as defined by 42 U.S.C. Chapter 114 The Protection and Advocacy Advocac y for Individuals with Mental Illness Act, § 10802(4)(A) and  (B)(i)(III). Gillespie was involuntarily confined in a municipal detention facility for  reasons other than serving a sentence resulting from conviction for a criminal offense. Gillespie’s involuntary confinement was in the George E. Edgecomb Courthouse, 800 E. Twiggs Street, Tampa, Florida. On June 1, 2011 Judge Arnold issued a politically motivated warrant to arrest Gillespie for the purpose of harming Gillespie by abuse as defined § 10802(1) and neglect as defined by § 10802(5) to force a walk-away settlement agreement in the state action, and to force a walk-away settlement agreement in the federal action, Gillespie’s civil rights and ADA lawsuit against the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Florida, et al., for the misuse and denial of judicial process under the color of  law, and denial of disability accommodation. accommoda tion. Gillespie was involuntary confined by two (2) fully armed deputies of the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office, and involuntarily held during an improper full deposition, depo sition, post final summary judgment, an open-ended  deposition without time limit, with no lunch break, and no meals usually given to an inmate, until Gillespie suffered injury and agreed to sign a walk-away settlement agreement. Gillespie was so impaired when he signed the agreement that the record  shows he was unable to make the settlement decision himself.” A copy of the opinion decided March 27, 2012 by Judge Richard Posner of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals accompanies this letter. (Exhibit 3). The American Bar Association Journal Law News Now reported this story March 28, 2012. (Exhibit 4). PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF PRIVATE MEDICAL INFORMATION

5. It doe doess not not appea appearr that that Mag Magis istr trat atee Judge Judge Davi David d Bake Baker, r, loca locate ted d in Orl Orland ando, o, coul could d read read my my ADA accommodation request and medical report located in Ocala when he made rulings in the

Ms. Sheryl L. Loesch, Clerk of Court U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida

Page - 5 April 5, 2012

case. Due to Mr. Rodems’ Rode ms’ repeated misrepresentation of my disability, I waived confidentiality and filed my private medical information on the public record, see Doc. 36. I found the public disclosure of my private medical information objectionable, revealing mental illness and other  disabilities contained in Dr. Huffer’s report and my ADA request, just as any reasonable person would find it objectionable, and a wrongful intrusion into my private life. Still, the Court has failed to consider my ADA disability information. TORTURE - ACT OF INFLICTING SEVERE PAIN PHYSICAL OR PSYCHOLOGICAL

6. As set set for forth th in in Doc. Doc. 36 (No (Noti tice ce of fili filing ng disa disabi bili lity ty and and ADA ADA info inform rmat atio ion) n),, “Sin “Since ce Mar March ch 3, 2006, Ryan Christopher Rodems, counsel for the Defendants, has directed, with malice aforethought, a course of harassing conduct conduc t toward Gillespie that has aggravated his disability, caused substantial emotional distress and serves no legitimate purpose.” Another word for Mr. Rodems’ behavior is torture: “Torture is the act of inflicting severe pain (whether physical or psychological) as a means of punishment, revenge, forcing information or a confession, or simply as an act of cruelty.” - Wikipedia. (Exhibit 5) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture The Psychology of Torture: “Torture, whether physical or psychological or both, depends on complicated interpersonal relationships between those who torture, those tortured, bystanders and others. Torture also involves deeply personal processes in those tortured, in those who torture and in others. These interacting psychological relationships, processes and dynamics form the basis for the psychology of torture.” - Wikipedia (Exhibit 6) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology_of_torture I alleged torture in this federal action, see Doc. 22, notice of voluntary dismissal. Because the Court would not disqualify Mr. Rodems, I had to dismiss my claims or endure further torture, which I could not bear. The Court raised the issue of “extraordinary circumstances” (Doc. 21) and I replied in Doc. 22 beginning on page three (3). Paragraph 12 states: “Judge Cook is knowingly and willfully harming Gillespie through a confusion technique. Judge Cook is doing this to help Mr. Rodems and Barker, Rodems & Cook   prevail over Gillespie in the lawsuit over which she presides. Judge Cook knowingly introduced false information into the court record and other such as a coercive technique used to induce psychological confusion and regression in Gillespie by bringing a superior  outside force to bear on his h is will to resist or to provoke a reaction in Gillespie. The CIA a manual on torture techniques, the KUBARK manual, calls this the Alice in Wonderland  or confusion technique.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KUBARK#CIA_manuals

Ms. Sheryl L. Loesch, Clerk of Court U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida

Page - 6 April 5, 2012

A copy of Dr. Huffer’s letter is attached to Doc. 22 as exhibit “A”. Dr. Huffer wrote: “As the litigation has proceeded, Mr. Gillespie is routinely denied participatory and testimonial access to the court. He is discriminated against in the most brutal ways possible. He is ridiculed by the opposition, accused of malingering by the Judge and now, with no accommodations approved or in place, Mr. Gillespie is threatened with arrest if he does not succumb to a deposition. This is like threatening to arrest a paraplegic if he does not show up at a deposition leaving his wheelchair behind. This is precedent setting in my experience. I intend to ask  for DOJ guidance on this matter.” (Dr. Huffer, October 28, 2010, paragraph 2) The United Nations (UN) Committee against Torture (CAT) prohibits torture, and torture is  prohibited under international law and the domestic laws of most countries in the 21st century, however the United States did not agree to join the UN ban on torture, and the United States claims it's citizens have the U.S. Constitution to protect them. Therefore it is appropriate to seek  redress for torture in federal court under 42 U.S.C. §1983. MOTION TO FILE ELECTRONICALLY DENIED

7. My mot motio ion n to file file ele elect ctro roni nical cally ly (Do (Doc. c. 6) 6) was was den denie ied d (Doc (Doc.. 17) 17) Oct Octobe oberr 17, 17, 2010 2010 by by Magistrate Judge Baker. I have maintained a PACER account in good standing since 1999. My notion to file electronically can also be considered a reasonable accommodation request under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). My request submitted to this Court September  28, 2010, and again in Doc. 36, see Exhibit 2, page 17, states as follows: “ADA Request No.6: Mr. Gillespie requests time to scan thousands of pages of  documents in this case to electronic PDF format. This case and underlying cause of  action covers a ten year period and the files have become unmanageable and confusing relative to Gillespie's disability. Mr. Gillespie is not able to concentrate when handling a large amount of physical files and documents. He is better able to manage the files and  documents when they are organized and viewable on his computer. Mr. Gillespie will  bear the cost of converting files and documents to PDF.” The failure to file electrically prevented me from being on an equal footing with the other parties in this case who could e-file documents doc uments from the comfort of their office or home without the time and expense of mailing, hiring h iring a courier service, or serving the documents docu ments in person. The technology to file documents docu ments electronically is fairly simple and cost effective. I have a website with documents in this case online a t the following URLs: http://yousue.org/litigation/ http://yousue.org/turner-v-rogers/

Ms. Sheryl L. Loesch, Clerk of Court U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida

Page - 7 April 5, 2012

http://yousue.org/ryan-christopher-rodems/ http://yousue.org/bar-complaint-of-robert-w-bauer/ http://yousue.org/circuit-court-judge-martha-j-cook/ http://yousue.org/13th-judicial-circuit-hillsborough-co-florida/ My emergency motion to disqualify counsel described above is also filed free on Scribd at http://www.scribd.com/doc/55960451/ Still, the document I personally filed in pa per format September 28, 2010 in the Ocala Division has not been put on the Court’s CM/ECF system to view on PACER. The United States District Court for the Northern District of California offers online e-filing registration instructions for pro se litigants, found at this URL: http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/pages/871 I meet the following technical requirements set forth by the Northern District of California: 1. A comp comput uter er,, the the inte intern rnet et,, and and emai emaill on a daily daily bas basis is so so you you can can e-fi e-file le you yourr docum document entss and  and  receive notifications from the Court. 2.

A sca scanne nnerr to to sca scan n docum document entss tha thatt are are only only in paper paper form format at (lik (likee exhi exhibi bits ts). ).

3. A prin printe ter/ r/co copi pier er beca becaus usee each each docu docume ment ntss that that you you e-f e-fil ilee will will als also o need need to to be sen sentt to the the  judge in hard copy (the judge’s copy is called the “chambers copy”). 4.

A word word-p -pro roce cess ssin ing g prog progra ram m to crea create te your your docu docume ment nts. s.

5. A .pdf .pdf rea reader der and a .pdf .pdf writ writer er,, whic which h enabl enables es you you to to conve convert rt wor word d proc proces essi sing ng doc docum ument entss into .pdf format. Only .pdf documents are accepted for e-filing. Adobe Acrobat is the most common program used. The reader (Adobe Acrobat Reader) is free, but the writer is not. Some word processing programs come with a .pdf .pd f writer already installed. The United States District Court for the Northern District of California offers an online pro se ECF Registration form in active PDF format. INCORRECT DATE/TIME STAMP ON COMPLAINT BY CLERK

8. The Cler Clerk’ k’ss date date/t /tim imee stam stamp p show showss the the Com Compl plai aint nt (Do (Doc. c. 1) 1) was was fil filed ed “20 “2010 10 SEP SEP 28 28 AM 7:47” which time is incorrect. The Court does not open until 8:30 AM, and I filed the Complaint myself in person by handing the Complaint directly to a deputy clerk about 8:47 AM.

Ms. Sheryl L. Loesch, Clerk of Court U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida

Page - 8 April 5, 2012

INCORRECT PLAINITFF ADDRESS BY CLERK OF COURT

9. The Cle Clerk rk use used d an incor incorre rect ct mai maili ling ng addr addres esss for for me, me, neces necessi sita tati ting ng a corr correc ecti tive ve moti motion, on, see Plaintiff’s Motion to Correct Mailing Address, filed October 5, 2010. (Doc. 9). My correct c orrect address is listed on the complaint and every document filed in this case. My address has not changed since 2005. The motion states as follows: “Plaintiff pro se Gillespie moves Court to correct his mailing address: 1. The Court is sending Plaintiff Gillespie's mail to the wrong address. Please use the correct address, listed on the complaint: 8092 SW I15th Loop, Ocala, Florida 34481.” INCORRECT PLAINITFF PHONE NUMBER BY CLERK OF COURT

10. The Cler Clerk k used used an incorr incorrect ect telepho telephone ne numbe numberr for for me, me, necess necessita itatin ting g a corre correcti ctive ve moti motion, on, see Plaintiff’s Motion to Correct Phone Number, filed Octobe r 13, 2010. (Doc. 15). 15 ). My correct  phone number is listed on the complaint and every document filed in this case. My home phone number has not changed since 2005. The motion states as follows: “Plaintiff pro se Gillespie moves the Court to correct his p hone number and states: 1. The PACER docket shows an incorrect phone number for Plaintiff pro se Gillespie. The correct phone number is listed on the complaint: (352) 854-7807.” FAILURE OF MR. RODEMS TO COMPLY - RULE 7.1 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

11. Mr. Rodems Rodems failed failed to compl comply y with with the the Rule Rule 7.1. 7.1. Disc Disclos losure ure Statem Statement ent and the the Cour Courtt did  did  not take any corrective action. Mr. Rodems represented Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA, which is a Florida profit corporation according to the Florida Division of Corporations. (Exhibit 8). Rule 7.1(a) states “A nongovernmental nongove rnmental corporate party must file 2 copies of a disclosure statement that: (1) identifies any parent corporation and any publicly held corporation owning 10% or more of its stock; or  (2) states that there is no such corporation. (b) Time to File; Supplemental Filing. A party must: (1) file the disclosure statement with its first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the court; and  (2) promptly file a supplemental statement if any required information cha nges. Upon information and belief, Barker, Rodems & Cook, PA is a nongovernmental corporate party under Rule 7.1(a) and Mr. Rodems had a duty to comply with Rule 7.1(b) and file the disclosure statement with his first appearance September 29, 2010. Mr. Rodems failed to do so. Had Mr. Rodems complied with Rule 7.1, the Court may have been better informed on the issue of my

Ms. Sheryl L. Loesch, Clerk of Court U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida

Page - 9 April 5, 2012

motion to disqualify Mr. Rodems as counsel. (Doc. 8). I believe Mr. Rodems’ Rod ems’ failure to comply with Rule 7.1(b) was intended to mislead the Court. FAILURE OF THE CLERK TO OFFER PRO SE SERVICES

12. The Unit United ed State Statess Distr District ict Court Court for for the the Midd Middle le Dist Distric rictt of Florid Floridaa does does not not appea appearr to offer pro se services as compared to other federal District Courts. This is a denial of equal  protection under the law under the Fourteenth Amendment. For example: The United States District Court for the Northern District of California offers pro se litigants a Pro Se Handbook, also known as a Handbook for Litigants Without a Lawyer, which can be downloaded online or available free of charge from the Clerk's Office. This is a link to “Representing Yourself in Federal Court: A Handbook for Pro Se Litigants” http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/prosehandbk  In addition to a pro se handbook, at the above abo ve link the District Court for the Northern District of  California offers the following services to pro se litigants: Official Court Forms in active PDF format. The link shows eleven (11) different forms. http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/civillitpackets Civil Litigation Packets, at the above URL, collections of forms in active PDF for the following: Complaint packet Motion packet Opposition (to motion) packet Initial Disclosures packet Motion for Permission for Electronic Case Filing and Proposed Order  Tips for Pro Se Filers: http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/prosetips The United States District Court for the Northern District of California has a comprehen sive directory of all Article III judges and Magistrate Judges with photos and biographies, found  online at this link http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges 28 USC § 455 - LETTER TO CHIEF JUDGE ANNE CONWAY

13. My lett letter er to to Chief Chief Judge Judge Conway Conway (Doc. (Doc. 68) 68) made made a reques requestt under under the federa federall Freed Freedom om of  Information Act, or other applicable law, pursuant to 28 USC § 455, for the biography and/or   personnel file of Magistrate Judge David A. Baker. As of today I do not have a reply. Subsequently I found some of this information myself with a Google search. It appears that Magistrate Judge Baker was formerly a partner in the law firm of Foley & Lardner, LLP. It

Ms. Sheryl L. Loesch, Clerk of Court U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida

Page - 10 April 5, 2012

appears that the tenure of Attorney David A. Baker at Foley & Lardner included time in the firm’s offices in Wisconsin and Orlando. On May 25, 2011 Krista J. Sterken, Esq., an associate of Foley & Lardner LLP, Wisconsin, telephoned me at 11:55 a.m. offering legal representation in this matter. (Doc. 49). Ms. Sterken’s offer of pro bono legal representation was only contingent upon a conflict search. On May 27, 2011 Michael D. Leffel, Esq., a partner at Foley & Lardner LLP, notified me that Foley & Lardner could not represent me. (Doc. 49). Neither Ms. Sterken nor Mr. Leffel informed me of a conflict as a result their conflict search. Therefore I con cluded that the decision not to represent me involved another issue. Given the forgoing, a reasonable person could conclude that Judge Baker may have had some role in the decision by Foley & Lardner not to represent me. CONCLUSION

Given the above, my experience in this case would cause a reasonable person to question the fairness and impartiality of this Clerk and this Court. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely,

 Neil J. Gillespie 8092 SW 115th Loop Ocala, Florida 34481 Telephone: (352) 854-7808 Email: [email protected] Enclosures CC: Honorable Anne C. Conway, Conway , Chief United States District Judge Hon. William Terrell Hodges, Ocala Division Hon. David A. Baker, Orlando Division Robert E. O'Neill, US Attorney, US Attorney's Office, 400 N. Tampa St., Suite 3200, Tampa, FL 33602-4798 (For the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Florida, e t. al) Catherine B. Chapman, Guilday, Tucker, Schwartz & Simpson, P.A., 1983 Centre Centre Pointe, Boulevard, Suite 200, Tallahassee, FL 32308-7823 (For Robert W. Bauer, et. al) Ryan C. Rodems, 400 North Ashley Drive, Suite 2100, Tampa, Florida 33602

VIOLATION OF BAR RULE 4-3.3 BY RYAN CHRISTOPHER RODEMS

Ryan Christopher Rodems, counsel for Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A. and William J. Cook, prevented the lawful adjudication of both the state and federal cases primarily through his repeated violation of FL Bar Rule 4-3.3 Candor Toward The Tribunal. Mr. Rodems violated the requirements of FL Bar Rule 4-3.3 in his response to the Court (Doc. 12) to the motion to disqualify (Doc. 8) as follows: 1. Mr. Mr. Rode Rodems ms fai faile led d to disc disclo lose se to to the the Cour Courtt the the actu actual al int inter eres estt of hims himsel elf, f, his his law law  partners, and his law firm Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A. in the Amscot litigation, as set forth in the Certificate of Interested Person in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in Eugene R. Clement, Gay Ann Blomefield, and Neil Gillespie v. AMSCOT Corporation, Case No. 01-14761-AA. (copy provided) 2. Mr. Mr. Rode Rodems ms fail failed ed to to disc disclo lose se to to the the Cour Courtt a let lette terr by Ams Amscot cot’s ’s lawy lawyer er,, Char Charle less Stutts of Holland & Knight, LLP, that described the relationship between the Amscot lawsuit and the state court case Neil J. Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A. and  William J. Cook, 05-CA-007205, Hillsborough Circuit Court. Mr. Stutts wrote Feb ruary 13, 2007 that “This “Th is former action [Amscot] is, of course, at the heart of your pending action against Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A.”. (copy provided). 3. Mr. Mr. Rode Rodems ms fai faile led d to disc disclo lose se to to the the Cour Courtt his his let lette terr dat dated ed Dec Decem ember ber 13, 2006 2006 to to  Neil J. Gillespie that set forth his prejudice in this matter, including: (copy provided) “I recognize that you are a bitter man who apparently has been victimized by your  own poor choices in life. You also claim to have mental or psychological problems, of which I have never seen documentation. However, your behavior in this case has  been so abnormal that I would not disagree with your assertions of mental  problems.” (P1, ¶3) “So, in addition to your case's lack of merit, you are cheap and not willing to pay the required hourly rates for representation.” (P3, ¶2). 4. Mr. Mr. Rode Rodems ms fai faile led d to dis discl clos osee to the the Cour Courtt his his actu actual al con confl flic ict, t, est establ ablis ished hed by Ord Order  er  of Circuit Court Judge Richard Nielsen dated January 13, 2006, that found a cause of  action for Fraud and Breach of Contract against Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A. and  William J. Cook in the state court action 05-CA-007205. (copy provided). Partners engaged in the practice of law are each responsible for the fraud or negligence of another   partner when the later acts within the scope of the ordinary business of an attorney. Smyrna Developers, Inc. v. Bornstein, 177 So.2d 16 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2d Dist. 1965).

Page 1 of 2

1

5. Mr. Mr. Rode Rodems ms fai faile led d to disc disclo lose se to to the the Cour Courtt lega legall auth author orit ity y in the the cont contro roll llin ing g  jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client, McPartland v. ISI Inv. Services, Inc., 890 F.Supp. 1029, M.D.Fla., 1995. In McPartland v. ISI Investment Services, Inc., 890 F.Supp. 1029, (US District Court, MD of Florida, Tampa Division) the court held that [1] Under Florida law, attorneys must avoid appearanc e of professional impropriety, and any doubt is to be b e resolved in favor of disqualification. [2] To prevail on motion to disqualify counsel, coun sel, movant must show existence of prior attorney-client relationship and that the matters in  pending suit are substantially related to the previous matter or cause of  action. [3] In determining whether attorney-client relationship existed, for   purposes of disqualification of counsel from later representing representing opposing  party, a long-term or complicated relationship is not required, and court must focus on subjective expectation of client that he is seeking legal advice. [5] For matters in prior representation to be “substantially related” to present representation for purposes of motion to disqualify counsel, matters need only be akin to present action in way reasonable persons would understand as important to the issues involved. [7] Substantial relationship between instant case in which law firm represented de fendant and issues in which firm had previously represented plaintiffs created  irrebuttable presumption under Florida law that confidential information was disclosed to firm, requiring disqualification. [8] Disqualification of  even one attorney from law firm on basis of prior representation of  opposing party necessitates disqualification of firm as a whole, under  Florida law.

Page 2 of 2

Case 8:99-cv-02795-RAL Document 121

Filed 12/10/01 Page 1 of 1 PageID 1363

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX

United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit 56 Forsyth Street, N.W. Atlanta, GA 30303-2289 (404) 335-6100

Closed Docket #: 01-14761-AA Short Style: Eugene R. Clement v. Amscot Corporation Docket Date: 08/23/2001 Lead Case: Agency: Nature of Suit: Other: Statutory Actions Misc. Type: Clerk: Dixon, Eleanor  Clerk Phone: (404) 335-6172

District Information Docket #: 99-02795-CV-T-26 Dkt Date: 12/08/1999

Judge: Richard A. Lazzara District: Florida-Middle

NOA Date: 08/20/2001

Office: MFL-Tampa

Secondary Case Information Docket #:

Judge:

Dkt Date: / /

Case Relationships Docke Dockett # Shor Shortt Sty Style le Relat Relation ion Statu Statuss Pending Motions  No Pending Motions

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX

United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit 56 Forsyth Street, N.W. Atlanta, GA 30303-2289 (404) 335-6100

01-14761-AA Eugene R. Clement v. v. Amscot Corporation Corporati on EUGENE R. CLEMENT, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated,

Plaintiff-Appellant, GAY ANN BLOMEFIELD,  NEIL GIL GILLESPIE, LESPIE,

Plaintiffs-Intervenors Counter-Defendants Appellants,

versus

AMSCOT CORPORATION, A Florida Corporation,

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX

Defendant-Intervenor  Counter-Claimant Appellee. United States Court OF Appeals FOR the Eleventh Circuit 56 Forsyth Street, N.W. Atlanta, GA 30303-2289 (404) 335-6100

Appellant

Appellant Attorney

Eugene R. Clement Address Not On File  Record Excer E xcerpts pts filed fi led on 10/03/2001 10/03/ 2001 Fees: Paid on 08/20/2001

William John Cook Barker, Rodems & Cook P.A. 400 N ASHLEY DR STE 2100 TAMPA, FL 33602-4350 (813) 489-1001 Fax: (813) 489-1008 [email protected]  No Briefing Brie fing Information Infor mation Found.

Gay Ann Blomefield Address Not On File  No Briefing Brie fing Information Infor mation Found. Fees: Paid on 08/20/2001

William John Cook Barker, Rodems & Cook P.A. 400 N ASHLEY DR STE 2100 TAMPA, FL 33602-4350 (813) 489-1001 Fax: (813) 489-1008 [email protected]  No Briefing Brie fing Information Infor mation Found.

Neil Gillespie Address Not On File  Appellant Brief Br ief Filed f iled on 10/03/2001 10/03/ 2001 Fees: Paid on 08/20/2001

William John Cook Barker, Rodems & Cook P.A. 400 N ASHLEY DR STE 2100 TAMPA, FL 33602-4350 (813) 489-1001 Fax: (813) 489-1008 [email protected]  No Briefing Brie fing Information Infor mation Found.

Appellee Amscot Corporation Address Not On File

Appellee Attorney Person Not Found   No Briefing Brie fing Information Infor mation Found.

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX

John A. Anthony GrayRobinson, P.A. 201 N FRANKLIN ST STE 2200 TAMPA, FL 33602-5822 (813) 273-5066 Fax: (813) 221-4113  [email protected]  [email protected]  No Briefing Brie fing Information Infor mation Found. Initial Service Lara R. Fernandez 101 E KENNEDY BLVD STE 2700 TAMPA, FL 33602-5150 (813) 227-7404 Fax: (813) 229-6553 [email protected]

United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit 56 Forsyth Street, N.W. Atlanta, GA 30303-2289 (404) 335-6100

File Date

Entry

Party

Pending

08/20/2001 08/20/2001 Fee Status: Status: Paid (08/20/01) (08/20/01) for Eugene Eugene R. Clement Clement

Eugene R. Clement

08/20/2001 Fee Status: Status: Paid (08/20/01) for Gay Ann Blomefield  Blomefield 

Gay Ann  No Blomefield 

08/20/2001 Fee Status: Status: Paid (08/20/01) for Neil Gillespi Gillespiee

 Neil Gillespie

  08/24/2001

DKT7CIV (Docketing 7) issued. cc: Loe sch, Sheryl L. cc: c c: Cook, William J. cc: Anthony, John A.

08/24/2001 Briefing Notice Issued 09/04/2001 Appearance Form Submitted: Submitted: Will William iam J. Cook 

 No

 No  No No

William John  No Cook 

09/04/2001 Transcript Order Form: Appellants- No transcript required

No

09/04/2001 Ci Civil Appeal Statement Form- Appellants

No

09/05/2001 P robable Jurisdiction Noted

No

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX

John A. Anthony

09/07/2001 09/07/2001 Appearance Form Form Submitted: ubmitted: John John A. A. Anthony Anthony 09/28/2001 Certificate of Readiness

 No No

  10/03/2001

Appellant's Brief Filed: Appellants-Clement, Appellants-Clement, Eugene E ugene R., Blomefield, Blomefield, Gay Ann, and Gillespie, Neil (Atty: William J. Cook)

 Neil Gillespie

 No

  10/03/2001

Record Excerpts: Excerpt s: Appellant-Clement, Appellant-Clement, Eugene R. (Atty: William William J. Cook)

Eugene R. Clement

 No

11/09/2001 Joint Stipulation to Dismiss Appeal with Prejudice

No

The parties joint stipulation for dismissal of this appeal with prejudice, which is construed as a s a motion to dismiss dismiss this appeal with prejudice,   12/07/2001 with the parties bearing their own costs and attorney fees, is GRANTED(JLE/RB).j   12/07/2001

DIS-4 (Dismissal 4 Letter) issued. cc: Cook, William J. cc: Anthony, John A. To: Loesch, Sheryl L.

12/07/2001 CASE CLOSED

 No

 No No

PACER Service Center Transaction Receipt 04/05/2012 14:12:01

Send Comment

PACER Login:

ng0053

Client Code:

njg

Description:

docket sheet

Case Num Number: ber:

01-14761-AA

Billable Pages:

4

Cost:

0.40

Change Client Code

View Billing History

Search

2

USPS - Track & Confirm

Page Page 1 of 1

Home Ho me | Help Help | Sign In

Tr ac k & Co Co n f i r m

Label/Receipt Number: 7010 0780 0000 8981 6504 Class: First-Class Mail ® Service(s): Certified Mail ™ Return Receipt Status: Delivered

FA Qs

 Enter Label/Receipt Number.

Your item was delivered at 10:11 am on August 31, 2010 in OCALA, FL 34475. Detailed Results: Delivered, August 31, 2010, 10:11 am, OCALA, FL 34475  Ac cep tan ce, A ug us t 30, 2010 , 2:51 p m, OCA LA , FL 3448 1 Processed th roug h Sort Facilit y, Augu st 30, 2010, 2010, 2:51 pm, OCALA, FL 34477 34477

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

Site Map

Customer Service

Forms

Copyright© 2010 USPS. All Rights Reserved.

Gov't Services

Careers

No FE FE AR AR Ac Act EE EEO Da Dat a

Privacy Policy

FOI A

Terms of Use

Business Customer Gateway

In the

United States Court of Appeals  Fo  F o r the t he S even ev enth th C ircu ir cuit it No. 11-2811 T ERRANCE P RUDE , Plaintiff-Appellant , , v.

D AVID A. C LARKE , J  , JR., et al., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. No. 2:10-cv-00167-JPS — J.P.  , Judgee. J.P. Stadtmueller , Judg

S UBMITTED M ARCH 7, 2012 — D ECIDED M ARCH 27, 27 , 2012

OO D , and Before P OSNER , W OOD a nd T INDER , Circuit Judges.

P OSNER , Circuit Judge. The plaintiff plaintiff in this prisoner’s prisoner’s civil rights suit brought under 42 U .S.C. § 1983 complains that he was subjected to cruel and unusual punishment  by pers pe rson onne nell of the th e Milw Mi lwau auke keee Co Coun unty ty Jail Jail.. (He (H e has a second, less substantial claim that we discuss at the end of the opinion.) He appeals from the grant of summary  judgm  jud gmen entt to the th e four fou r defend def end ants, ant s, wh who o are the th e Sherif She rifff

3

2

N o . 1 1-2 8 11

of Milwaukee County, two County Inspectors who work at the jail, and a guard. The plaintiff is serving time in a Wisconsin state prison, but was transferred to the county jail on several occasions to enable him to attend court proceedings relating to a postconviction petition that he had filed. On the second and third stays, which lasted a week and 10 days respectively, the jail fed him only “nutriloaf,” pursuant to a new policy the jail had adopted of making nutriloaf the exclusive diet of prisoners who had been in segregation in prison at the time of their transfer to the jail, even if their behavior in the jail was exemplary. Nutriloaf (also spelled “nutraloaf”) is a badtasting food given to prisoners as a form of punishment (it is colloquially known as “prison loaf” or “disciplinary loaf”). See, e.g., Jeff Ruby, “Dining Critic Tries Nutraloaf, the Prison Food for Misbehaving Inmates,” Chicago  Ma gazin ga zin e , Sept. Sep t. 201 2010, 0, ww www. w.ch chic icago agoma mag.c g.com om/Ch /Ch icagoica goMagazine/September-2010/Di Magazine/September-2 010/Dining-Criti ning-Critic-Tries-Nutraloa c-Tries-Nutraloaffthe-Prison-Food-for-Misbehaving-Inmates; Arin Greenwood, “Taste-Testing Nutraloaf: The Prison Loaf That Just Might Be Unconstitutionally Bad,” Slate ,  Ju n e 24 , 20 08 , w w w .s late la te .c om /art /a rt ic le s /n ew s _a n d_ politics/jurisprudence/2008/06/tastetesting_nutraloaf.html; Matthew Purdy, “Our Towns: What’s Worse Than Solitary Confinement? Just Taste This,” N.Y. Times , Aug. Au g. 4, 2002, www.nytimes.com/2002/08/ www.nytimes.com/2002/08/04/nyregion/our04/nyregion/our-townstownswhat-s-worse-than-solitary-confinement-just-tastethis.html (all visited March 15, 2012).

N o . 1 1-2 8 11

3

On his third stay, after two days on the nutriloaf diet, the plaintiff began vomiting his meals and experiencing stomach pains and constipation. (He had vomited during the second stay as well.) He stopped eating nutriloaf and subsisted for the eight remaining days of his stay on bread and water (it’s unclear how he obtained the bread). He had weighed 168 pounds before his second and third stays at the jail, had lost either 5 or 6 pounds during the second stay, had not regained them, and by the end of the third stay was down to 154 pounds: he had lost 8.3 percent of his weight as a result of the two stays (and he had not been overweight at 168). A guard sent him to the infirmary after one of the vomiting incidents during his third stay, and the nurses there gave him antacids and a stool softener and one of them told him his weight loss was “alarming.” Upon his return to state prison he continued experiencing painful defecation and bloody stools, and he was diagnosed with an anal fissure that the defendants have not denied had developed while he was in th e county jail. The defendants’ response to his suit has been contumacious, and we are surprised that the district judge did not impose sanctions. The defendants ignored the plaintiff’s discovery demands, ignored the judge’s order that they comply with those demands, and continued their defiance even after the judge threatened to impose sanctions. But the judge failed to carry through on his threat, so the threat proved empty. The only evidence the defendants submitted in support of their motion for summary judgment was a

4

N o . 1 1-2 8 11

preposterous affidavit from a sheriff’s officer who is also an assistant chief of a suburban Wisconsin fire department. The affidavit states only, so far as bears on the appeal, that “Nutraloaf has been determined to be a nutritious substance for regular meals.” The defendants made no effort to qualify him as an expert witness. As a lay witness, he was not authorized to offer hearsay evidence (“has been determined to be . . . nutritious”). No evidence was presented concerning the recipe for or ingredients of the nutriloaf that was served at the county jail during the plaintiff’s sojourns ther e. “Nutriloaf” isn’t a proprietary food like Hostess Twinkies but, like “meatloaf” or “beef stew,” a term for a composite food the recipe of which can vary from institution to institution, or even from day to day within an institution; nutriloaf could meet requirements for calories and protein one day yet be poisonous the next if, for example, made from leftovers that had spoiled. The recipe was among the items of information that the plaintiff sought in discovery and that the defendants refused to produce. Even an affidavit from an expert stating after a detailed chemical analysis that “nutriloaf meets all dietary requirements” would be worthless unless the expert knew and stated that nutriloaf invariably was made the same way in the institution. The assistant fire chief’s affidavit says no such thing — and a nd he was not an expert. In addition to stonewalling the plaintiff and the district judge, the defendants failed to file a brief in this

N o . 1 1-2 8 11

5

court and failed to respond to our order to show cause why they hadn’t filed a brief. They seem to think that the federal courts have no jurisdiction over a county jail. Deliberate withholding of nutritious food or substitution of tainted or otherwise sickening food, with the effect of causing substantial weight loss, vomiting, stomach pains, and maybe an anal fissure (which is no fun at all, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anal_fissure (visited March 15, 2012)), or other severe hardship, would violate the Eighth Amendment. See, e.g., Hutto v. Finney ,  At kin s v. Ci ty of Ch Chica icago go , 631 437 U.S. 678, 687 (1978);  Atkin F.3d 823, 830 (7th Cir. 2011); Sanville v. McCaughtry , 266 F.3d 724, 734 (7th Cir. 2001); Simmons v. Cook , 154 F.3d 805, 808 (8th Cir. 1998). Not that all nutriloaf is unhealthful, though all is reputed to have an unpleasant taste. But we do not know the recipe for the nutriloaf that was served the plaintiff, or whether the ingredients were tainted or otherwise unhealthful, because of the defendants’ failure to comply with the plaintiff’s discovery demands. The defendants decided to defy rather than to defend. The uncontradicted evidence is that other prisoners in the jail also vomited after eating the nutriloaf, and this suggests that it was indeed inedible. The only possible justification for the district court’s rejection of the plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim, at this early stage of the litigation, is that he may not have sued the right defendants, since he can prevail against a defendant only by proving that the defendant was deliberately indifferent to his health. The guard who sent him to th e infirmary knew he had vomited, but

6

N o . 1 1-2 8 11

the guard sent him for medical attention and there is no suggestion that he was responsible for the composition of the nutriloaf or had any reason to suspect its ill effects until the plaintiff got sick. The nurses may have realized that the plaintiff would suffer seriously if he weren’t given a different diet, and maybe they should have done something other than just treat his symptoms,  but  bu t they th ey are not no t defen de fenda dant nts. s. We don’t do n’t know kn ow the th e precise role that any of the four defendants—the sheriff, who runs the jail, the two inspectors, and the jail guard (whether he was the guard who sent the plaintiff to the infirmary or some other guard is another thing we don’t know) — played p layed in making the plaintiff sick. He filed a grievance with the jail, although after his last sojourn there, when he was back in state prison with its adequate diet. The grievance states that the defendant inspectors had authorized the nutriloaf for the prisoners in the part of the jail in which the plaintiff was housed and that they’d done this pursuant to policy established by the defendant sheriff. Complaints filed by unrepresented prisoners are sup M cN eil v. Unite Un itedd posed to be construed liberally. E.g.,  McN States,  508 U.S. 106, 113 (1993); Haines v. Kerner , 404  M ars hall ha ll v. Knig Kn ight ht , , 445 U.S. 519, 520 (1972) (per curiam);  Mars F.3d 965, 969 (7th Cir. 2006); Chavis v. Chappius , 618 F.3d F.3 d 162, 170-71 (2d Cir. 2010). There are intimations in the record that jail officials — who w ho may have included one or more of the named defendants — were w ere aware of the plaintiff’s plight, and it is apparent that nothing was done to replace the nutriloaf diet that was sickening him, though he was able somehow to obtain bread. The

N o . 1 1-2 8 11

7

record contains statements that he had “tried to solve this problem by speaking with a [correctional officer],” that after a second incident of vomiting he “told officers again,” that he was “taken to the clinical office to be seen by a nurse” (presumably guards took him there), that other inmates were vomiting their nutriloaf meals (which must h ave been observed by correctional officers), and that he had written the sheriff informing him about their vomiting. Adult vomiting other than  bec ause au se of illn illnes esss or dru nken nk enne ness ss is rare rar e — healthy, h ealthy, sober adults do not vomit a meal just because it doesn’t taste good — and a nd if the plaintiff is being truthful there was a veritable epidemic of vomiting during his stay. “A risk can be so obvious that a jury may reasonably infer actual knowledge on the part of the defendants.” Hall v. Bennett , , 379 F.3d F.3 d 462 462,, 464 (7th (7t h Cir. Ci r. 200 2004); 4); see Farmer v. Brennan , 511 U .S. .S . 825, 82 5, 842 842-43 -43 (19 (1994) 94).. The Th e defen def endan dants ts have submitted no contrary evidence, once the inadmissible affidavit from the assistant fire chief is ruled out. It is a possible though certainly not an inevitable inference from the record (and from the defendants’ contumacy) that jail officials were aware that the nutriloaf  being  bei ng fed fe d th e priso pri sone ners rs wh when en the th e plaint pla intiff iff was there th ere was sickening him yet decided to do nothing about it. That would be deliberate indifference to a serious health problem and thus state an Eighth Amendment claim. The dismissal of the suit was premature. Since the plaintiff has departed from the county jail and the case involves medical issues, we suggest that the district court request a lawyer to assist him in litigating his

8

N o . 1 1-2 8 11

claim. The court should also consider imposing sanctions on the defendants. The plaintiff’s other claim is that the defendant jail guard offered him a sandwich (and not of nutriloaf, either) if he would spy on other prisoners, and that he had refused. Bribing prisoners in a nonfederal jail to inform on other prisoners does not violate any federal law of which we’re aware. The failure to give the plaintiff the sandwich could not be thought cruel and unusual punishment for his refusing to take the bribe, for it made him no worse off than he would have been had no bribe been offered — stuck s tuck with a nutriloaf diet. The second claim adds nothing to the first, so we affirm its rejection. The judgment is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. We order the defendants to show cause within 14 days of the date of this order why they should not be sanctioned for contumacious conduct in this court. If they ignore this order to show cause like the last one, they will find themselves in deep trouble.

3-27-12

For One One Prisoner, Prisoner, Nutriloaf Nutriloaf Diet May Violate Eight Eighth h Am Amendment endment,, Posner Posner ...

http://www.abajourn http://www.abajournal.com al.com/news/article/for_one_prisoner_n /news/article/for_one_prisoner_nut utriloaf_die... riloaf_die...

Constitutional Law

For One Priso ner, Nutri lo af Diet Diet May May Vio Vio late Eighth Am endm ent, Posn Posn er Opi Opi ni on Says Posted Mar 28, 2012 6:25 A M CDT By Debra Cassens Weiss  A federal fed eral appeals court has has reinstated a law lawsuit suit filed by a prisoner who who claimed the nutriloaf nutriloaf he ate in the Milwa Milwaukee ukee County Jail was cruel and unusual punishment. The opinion opinion (PDF)  (PDF) by Judge Richard Posner of the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals suggested appointment of counsel f or the inmate, Terrance Terrance Prude, who vomited and suff ered an anal fissure after eating nutriloaf nutriloaf at the jail during during a stay to attend court proceedings. Jail officials gave Prude bread and water as a substitute, and his weight dropped from 168 to 154 after two s tays at the facility. facility. Other inmates at the jail also vomited after eating nutriloaf. nutriloaf. Withholding nutritious nutritious foo d or o r substituting sickening foo d, causing subs tantial tantial weight loss, vomiting and maybe an anal fissure would violate violate the Eighth Amendme nt, Posner said. He cited Wikipedia fo r the propo sition that that such a fiss ure is “no f un at at all.” The def endants, including including Sheriff David D avid Clarke Clarke Jr. J r.,, did not disclose the nutriloaf recipe in response to discovery demands. “No evidence was pres ented co ncerning the recipe f or or ingredients o f the nutriloaf that was was served at the county jail jail during during the plaintiff’s plaintiff’s s ojourns there,” Pos ner wrote. “ ‘Nutriloaf’ ‘Nutriloaf’ isn’t a proprietary foo d like Hostess Twinkies Twinkies but, like ‘meatloaf’ ‘meatloaf’ or o r ‘beef  stew,’ a term term for f or a com posite food foo d the rec ipe of which which can vary from institution institution to institution, institution, or even fro m day to day within within an institution; nutriloaf could meet requirements for calories and protein one day yet be poisonous the next if, for example, made from leftovers that had spoiled.” Posner said the defendants ignored discovery demands and the trial judge’s order that they comply. The defendants also failed to file an appellate brief and failed to respond to an order to show cause whey they didn’t do so. “They seem to think that the fed eral courts have no jurisdiction jurisdiction over a c ounty jail,” jail,” Posner Pos ner said. The appeals c ourt issued an order to show cause why the defendants should not be sanctioned for contumacious conduct and warned they “will find themselves in deep trouble” if  they fail to co mply. mply. The case is Prude v. Clarke . Hat tip to How Appealing. Appealing . Copyright 2012 American Bar Association. All rights reserved.

4

Torture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Torture  is

the act ac t of inflicting severe pain pa in (whether physical or   psychological)  psychological) as a means of punishment, punishment, revenge, forcing information information or a confession, or simply simply as an act of cruelty. Throughout Throughout history, history, torture has taken take n on a wide variety of forms, and has often been used as a method of political re-education, interrogation, punishment, punishment, and coercion. coe rcion. In addition to statesponsored torture, individuals individuals or groups may be motivated to inflict inflict torture on others ot hers for simil similar ar reasons to those t hose of a state; stat e; however, howeve r, the motive for torture can also be for the sadistic gratification gratification of the torturer. Torture is prohibited under international internat ional law and the domestic laws of most countries in the 21st century centu ry.. It is considered to be a violation violation of human rights, and is declared to be u nacceptable nacce ptable by Article 5 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Signatories Signatories of the Third Geneva Convention an d Fourth Geneva Convention officially officially agree not to torture prisoners in in armed conflicts. Torture is also prohibited by the United Nations Convention Against Torture, Torture, which has been ratified by 147 [1]

countries.

A variety of torture instruments including, at right, the iron maiden of Nuremberg.

 National and international legal legal prohibitions prohibitions on torture derive from a consensus that torture and similar  similar  ill-treatment are immoral, as well as impractical.[2] Despite these international conventions, organizations organizations that monitor abuses of human rights rights (e.g. Amnesty Inte rnational, the International Reha bilitation bilitation Council for Torture Torture Victims) ictims) report widespread use condoned by states in many regions of the world.[3] Amnesty International estimates that at least 81 world governments governments currently current ly practice torture, some of them openly. openly.[4]

1 Definitions 2 History 2.1 Antiquity 2.2 Middle Ages 2.3 Early modern period 2.4 Recent times 2.5 Historical Historical methods of execution e xecution and a nd capital punishment 2.6 Etymology 3 Religious prohibitions 3.1 Roman Catholic Church 4 Laws against torture 4.1 United Nations Convention Against Torture 4.1.1 Optional Protocol Prot ocol to the UN Convention Against Against Torture Torture 4.2 Rome Statute of the t he International Interna tional Crimi Criminal nal Court 4.3 Geneva Conventions

5

Psychology of torture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology_of_torture

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Torture, whethe r physical or psychological psychological or both, depends on complicated complicated interpersonal relationships relationships between those who torture, those t hose tortured, bystanders and others. ot hers. Torture Torture also involves deeply personal processes in those tortured, in those who torture and in others. othe rs. These interacting psychological psychological relationships, relationships, processes and  dynamics form the basis for the psychology of torture .

1 The torture process to the torturer  1.1 Motivation to torture 2 See also 3 References 4 Further reading 5 External Exte rnal links

Motivation to torture

Research over the past 50 years, starting with the Milgram Milgram experiment, suggests suggests that under the right right circumstances and with the appropriate encouragement and setting, most people can be encouraged to actively [1]

torture others. John Conroy:

When torture takes place, people believe they are on the high moral ground, that the nation is under  threat and they are the front line protecting the nation, and people will be grateful for what they are doing.[2] [3]

Confidence in the efficacy of torture is based upon the behaviorist theory of human behavior. Stages Stages of torture t orture mentali menta lity ty include:

Reluctant or peripheral participation Official Official encouragement: encoura gement: As the Stanford prison experiment and a nd Milgram Milgram experim expe riment ent show, show, many people will will follow follow the direction of an authority figure (such as a superior officer) in an a n official setting (especially (especially if presented as mandatory), even if they have personal pe rsonal uncertainty. The main main motivations for this this appear  to be fear of loss of status or respect, and the desire to be seen as a "good citizen" or "good subordinate". Peer encouragement: to accept torture as necessary, acceptable or deserved, or to comply from a wish to not reject peer group beliefs. Dehumanization: Dehumanization: seeing victims victims as objects object s of curiosi c uriosity ty and a nd experim expe rimentation, entation, where pain pa in becomes just another test to see how it affects the victim. Disinhibi Disinhibition: tion: socio-cultural socio-cultural and situational pressures may cause torturers to undergo a lessening of moral inhibitions inhibitions and as a result act in ways not normally normally countenanced counte nanced by law, law, custom and conscience. co nscience.

6

U.S. Army and CIA interrogation manuals - Wikipedia, the free en encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KUBARK  

After this 1992 investigation, the Department of Defense discontinued the use of the manuals, directed their  recovery to the extent practicable, and destroyed the copies in the field. U.S. Southern Command advised  governments in in Latin America that the manuals contained pa ssages ssages that did not represent U.S. government government  policy,  policy, and pursued recovery of the manuals manua ls from from the governments and some individual individual students.[10] Notably, David Addington Addington and Dick Cheney retained personal pe rsonal copies of the training manuals. manuals.[11] Soon after The army a rmy created FM 34-52 Intelligence Intelligence Interrogation manual. This This was used by the U.S. Army Army until 2007.

7 The first manual, "KUBARK "KUBARK Counterintell Counte rintellig igence ence Interrogation," dated July 1963, is the source of much of the material mate rial in in the second manual. KUBARK was a U.S. Central Intelligence [13]

Agency cryptonym for the CIA itself.  The cryptonym KUBARK KUBARK appears in the title of a 1963 CIA document KUBARK  Counterintelligence Interrogation Interrogation which describes de scribes interrogation interrogation techniques, including, among other things, "coercive counterintelligence counterintelligence interrogation interrogation of resistant resistant sources". This is the oldest manual, and promotes the use of abusive techniques, as [13]

exemplified by two references to the use of electric shock.

The second manual, "Human Resource Exploitation Training  Manual - 1983,"  was  was used in at a t least seven U.S. U.S. training courses conducted conducte d in Latin American countries, co untries, including including Honduras,  between 1982 a nd 1987. According to a declassified declassified 1989 report  prepared for the Senate intelligence intelligence committee, the 1983 manual

Techniques discussed in School of the Americas training manuals, 1987-1991: [12][5][1]

• Motivation by fear  • Payment of bounties for enemy dead  • False imprisonment • Use Use of truth serum • Torture • Execution • Extortion • Kidnapping and arresting a target’s family members

[4]

was developed from notes of a CIA interrogation course in Honduras. [14][15]

Both manuals dea l exclusively with with interrogation.  Both manuals have an entire chapter devoted to "coercive techniques." These manuals recommend arresting suspects suspects early e arly in the morning by surprise, surprise,  blindfolding  blindfolding them, and stripping them naked. Suspects should be held incommuni incommunicado cado and a nd should be deprived of  any kind of normal routine in e ating and sleeping. Interrogation rooms should be windowless, windowless, soundproof, da rk  and without toilets. The manuals advise that torture techniques can backfire and that the threat of pain is often more effective than  pain itself. itself. The manuals describe describe coercive coerc ive techniques to be used "to "t o induce psychological psychological regression regression in the subject by bringing a superior outside force to bear bea r on his will will to resist." These techniques tec hniques include prolonged  prolonged  constraint, prolonged exertion, extremes of hea t, cold, or moisture, deprivation of food or sleep, disrupting routines, solitary solitary confinement, c onfinement, threats of pain, deprivation of sensory stimuli, stimuli, hypnosis, and use of drugs or  [5][16]

 placebos.

Between 1984 and 1985, after aft er congressional committees committees began questioni que stioning ng training techniques being used by the CIA in La tin America, America, the t he 1983 manual went through substantial revision. In 1985 a page advising against against using coercive techniques was inserted at the front of Human Resource Exploitation Exploi tation Training Manual. Handwritten changes were also introduced haphazardly into the text. For example, "While we do not stress the use of coercive techniques, we do want to make you aware of them and the proper way to use them," has been altered to, "While we deplore the use of coercive techniques, we do want to make you aware of them so that you may avoid them." (p. A-2) But the entire ent ire chapter on coercive techniques is still still provided provided with some items

www.sunbiz.org - Department of State

Previous on List

Next on List

No Events

No Name History

http://www.sunbiz.org/scripts/cordet.exe?action=DETFIL&inq_doc_num...

Return To List

Deta De tail il by Entity Na Nam me Florida Profit Corporation BARKER, RODEMS & COOK, P.A.

Filing Information Document Number  Number P00000075354 P00000075354 FEI/EIN Numb Numb er 

593672653

Date Filed

08/04/2000

State

FL

Status

 ACTIVE

Principal Add ress ress 501 EAST KENNEDY KENNEDY BOULEVARD, BOULEVARD, STE. 790 TAMPA FL 33602 US Changed 07/07/2011

Mailin Mailin g Add ress ress 501 EAST KENNEDY KENNEDY BOULEVARD, BOULEVARD, STE. 790 TAMPA FL 33602 US Changed 07/07/2011

Registered Agent Name & Address BARKER, CHRIS A 501 EAST KENNEDY BOULEVARD SUITE 790 TAMPA FL 33602 US  Address Changed: Changed: 01/06/2012

Officer/Director Detail Name & Address Title P BARKER, CHRIS A 501 EAST KENNEDY BOULEVARD, SUITE 790 TAMPA FL 33602 US Title VP RODEMS, RYAN C 501 EAST KENNEDY BOULEVARD, SUITE 790 TAMPA FL 33602 US Title ST

8

www.sunbiz.org - Department of State

http://www.sunbiz.org/scripts/cordet.exe?action=DETFIL&inq_doc_num...

COOK, WILLIAM J 501 EAST KENNEDY BOULEVARD, SUITE 790 TAMPA FL 33602 US

 An n ual Repo rt s Report Report Year ear Filed Filed Date Date 2010

01/ 06/2010

2011

03/ 02/2011

2012

01/ 06/2012

Document Images Images 01/06/2012 -- ANNUAL REPORT 06/30/2011 -- ADDRESS CHANGE 03/02/2011 03/02/ 2011 -- ANN ANNUAL UAL REPORT 01/06/2010 -- ANNUAL REPORT 03/27/2009 -- ANNUAL REPORT 01/14/2008 -- ANNUAL REPORT 02/09/2007 -- ANNUAL REPORT 04/10/2006 -- ANNUAL REPORT 01/03/2005 -- ANNUAL REPORT 01/28/2004 -- ANNUAL REPORT 03/07/2003 -- ANNUAL REPORT 01/10/2002 -- ANNUAL REPORT 04/23/2001 -- ANNUAL REPORT 08/04/2000 -- Dome Domestic stic Profit Note:  This is not official record. See documents if question or conflict.

Previous on List

Next on List

No Events

No Name History

Return To List

| Home Home | Contact us | Document Document Searche Searches s | E-Filing E-Filing Services Services | Forms Forms | Help Help | Copyr ight © and Privacy Policies es State of Florida, Department of State

 Account Information Information Redacted Redacted

9

UPS: Tracking Information

http://wwwapps.ups.com/WebTracking/processPOD?lineData=Atlanta^...

Proof of Delivery

Close Window

Dear Customer, This notice serves as proof of delivery for the shipment listed below. Tracking Number: Service: Weight: Shipped/Billed On: Delivered On: Delivered To: Signed By: Left At:

1Z64589FNW95960107 UPS Next Day Air Saver® 1.00 lb 07/27/2012 07/30/2012 10:59 A.M.  ATLANTA,  ATLANTA, GA, US ONEIL Front Desk

Thank you for giving us this oppo rtunity rtunity to se rve you. Sincerely, UPS Tracking Tracking results provided by UPS: 08/10/2012 10:02 A.M. A.M. ET Print This Page

Close Window