Court Filings

Order SC11-1622 February 11,2014

Description
Petitioner's withdrawal of motions for surrender of files is hereby acknowledged. Petitioner has filed an Application for Order on September 30, 2013, requesting that the file for this case, in lieu of destruction, be released to him subsequent to the Court's retention timeline requirement, in compliance with Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.430(g). Petitioner's request is attached as Appendix A. All parties have twenty days from the date of this order to submit, in writing, any objection to Petitioner's request. Any objection submitted must also be served on all other parties; the parties who are served with objections have fifteen days to respond.
Categories
Published
of 5
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Related Documents
Share
Transcript
  ~u rt t   C Court of jflorfba TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11 2014 CASE NO.: SCII-1622 Lower Tribunal No(s).: 2DIO-5197; 05-CA-7205 NEIL J GILLESPIE vs. BARKER, RODEMS COOK, ETAL. Petitioner(s) Respondent(s) Petitioner's withdrawal of motions for surrender of files is hereby acknowledged. Petitioner has filed an Application for Order on September 30, 2013, requesting that the file for this case, in lieu of destruction, be released to him subsequent to the Court's retention timeline requirement, in compliance with Fla R Jud Admin 2.430(g). Petitioner's request is attached as Appendix A All parties have twenty days from the date of this order to submit, in writing, any objection to Petitioner's request. Any objection submitted must also be served on all other parties; the parties who are served with objections have fifteen days to respond. A True Copy Test: ~om ino   Clerk, Supretne Court ab Served: RYAN CHRISTOPHER RODEMS NEIL J GILLESPIE HON. PAT FRANK, CLERK HON. JAMES BIRKHOLD, CLERK    SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA STATE OF FLORIDA NEIL J. GILLESPIE Plaintiff/Counter Defendant, Case: SCII-1622 Lower Tribunal: 05-CA-7205 vs. BARKER, RODEMS & COOK, P.A. and WILLIAM J. COOK, Defendants/Counter Plainti ffs. / APPLICATION FOR ORDER Applicant Neil J. Gillespie (hereinafter Applicant ), reluctantly appearing pro se due to indigence and/or insolvency, here in the first person, applies to the Supreme Court of Florida pursuant to Rule 2.430(g), Fla.R.Jud.Admin., for an Order requiring the Clerk to deliver to the Applicant the court records in Case: SC 11-1622 that are to be destroyed or disposed of Rule 2.430(g), Fla.R.Jud.Admin.: g) Disposition ther Than Destruction. Before destruction or disposition of court records under this rule, any person may apply to the court for an order requiring the clerk to deliver to the applicant the court records that are to be destroyed or disposed ot: All parties shall be given notice of the application. The court shall dispose of that court record as appropriate. No paTty, person or entity other than me filed anything in the case. All parties shown on the certificate of service were provided acopy of this application. RESPECFULLY SUBMITTED September 27,2013.  Certificate o Service I certify that the Application For Order in Case No. SC 11-1622 in the Florida Supreme Court was provided September 27, 2013 to: HON. THOMAS D. HALL Office o the Clerk Supreme Court o Florida 500 South Duval Street Tal1ahassee, Florida 32399 VIA V P S No. IZ64589FP290801254 I certify that a copy hereof has been furnished to each o the following: HON. JAMES BIRKHOLD Clerk o the Second District Court o Appeal 1005 E. Memorial Blvd. Lakeland, FL 33801 VIA V P S No. lZ64589FP293714825 HON. PAT FRANK, Clerk o Circuit Court County Center 601 E. Kennedy Blvd. Tampa, FL 33602 VIA V P S No. lZ64589FP291209232 Ryan Christopher Rodems Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A. 501 E Kennedy Blvd. Suite 790 Tampa, Florida 33602-5258 VIA V P S No. 1Z64589FP290126047 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED September 27,2013.    .ã   . I ~uprtmt   ctourt of jflortba MONDAY, MARCH 12, 2012 2213SEP3 P 1=29 CASE NO.: SC 11-1622 Lower Tribunal No(s).: 2DI o¥ 97, OS-CA- 7P ;20ms~------ NEIL J. GILLESPIE vs. BARKER, RODEMS COOK, ET AL. Petitioner(s) Respondent( s) The petitioner has filed a petition for writ of mandamus with the Court. To the extent the petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directed towards the district court, the petition is denied because a writ of mandamus cannot be issued to direct the manner in which a court shall act in the lawful exercise of its jurisdiction. State ex reI. North St. Lucie River Drainage Dis!. v. Kanner, 11 So. 2d 889, 890 (Fla. 1943); see also Migliore v. City of Lauderhill, 415 So. 2d 62, 63 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (stating that ma:ndamus is not an appropriate vehicle for review of a merely erroneous decision nor is it proper to mandate the doing (or undoing) of a discretionary act ), approved, 431 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 1983). To the extent the petitioner seeks any additional relief, the petition is dismissed as facially insufficient. PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur. A True Copy Test: ~lf, I/L   Clerlc lt Sliprellle ~ tut   kb Served: NEIL J GILLESPIE / RY AN CHRISTOPHER RODEMS HON. PAT FRANK, CLERK HON. JAMES BIRKHOLD, CLERK

CAP_EN

Jul 23, 2017
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks