Rebuttal To Response of Robert W. Bauer, TFB 2013-00,540 (8B)

VIA U.P.S. No.
1Z64589FP296200759 May 28, 2013

Annemarie Craft, Bar Counsel
The Florida Bar - ACAP
651 East J efferson Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2300
RE: Rebuttal to response of Robert W. Bauer dated Feb-09-2013/stamped Feb-18-2013
The Florida Bar File No. 2013-00,540 (8B)
Dear Ms. Craft:
Thank you for extending time until today, May 28, 2013, for me to submit this rebuttal.
The Florida Bar Lawyer Referral Service (LRS) referred me to Mr. Bauer February 26, 2007.
Mr. Bauer was not competent (Rule 4-1.1) and not diligent (Rule 4-1.3). Mr. Bauer churned bills
for his benefit until he bled me dry, whereupon he dropped the case. Mr. Bauer is the only reason
I continued litigation in 2007 against Barker, Rodems & Cook. However this is not a fee dispute.
This complaint is not requesting a refund of $19,212 in fees paid to Mr. Bauer. My complaint
against Mr. Bauer is well beyond mere money, we are now in the realm of unremittable costs.
Currently my home is in foreclosure, I have no savings, and my only income is Social Security
disability. I relied on the LRS, reposed trust in Mr. Bauer, and The Florida Bar. Unfortunately
those parties violated that trust, and their obligation to me as a consumer of legal services.
Mr. Bauer responded that my current complaint merely repeats similar allegations dismissed by
The Florida Bar in my 2010 complaint, TFB File No. 2011-00,073(8B). Mr. Bauer is wrong.
First, my 2010 complaint sought a refund of fees, so that I could pay replacement counsel. This
complaint does not seek a refund of fees. Second, Mr. Watsons Letter Report of March 18, 2011
closing the complaint in compliance with Rule 3-7.4(k) shows no consideration or adjudication
of any violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct. My 2010 complaint did not allege Rule
violations. Mr. Watsons Letter Report was clear: Because the Bar only has the authority to
address questions of ethics, the committee could not address any legal issues about which you
may feel concerned. Thus, this complaint alleges questions of ethics by Mr. Bauer not
previously submitted to The Florida Bar or yet considered by a grievance committee:
Breach of Rule 4-1.1. Mr. Bauer is not competent.
Breach of Rule 4-1.3. Mr. Bauer is not diligent.
Breach of Rule 4-8.4(c). Mr. Bauer engaged in dishonesty, fraud, deceit, and misrepresentation.
Breach of Rule 4-8.4(d). Mr. Bauer engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.
Breach of Rule 4-8.3(a). Mr. Bauer failed to report misconduct of other lawyers, Mr. Rodems.
Mr. Bauer was not competent (Rule 4-1.1) and not diligent (Rule 4-1.3) in litigating my claims.
Additionally Mr. Bauer was not competent (Rule 4-1.1) and not diligent (Rule 4-1.3) defending a
counterclaim against me, a vexations libel counter suit for which the LRS referred him.
Annemarie Craft, Bar Counsel May 28, 2013
The Florida Bar - ACAP Page - 2
Fraudulent Representation and Bill Churning by Robert W. Bauer
Breach of fiduciary duty to client Neil Gillespie
My letter of March 28, 2013 to Gwynne Young requested investigation of similar allegations
against Mr. Bauer, questions of ethics raised by Kim Barry, a former Bauer client. In
paragraph number 4 of his February 2013 response, Mr. Bauer stated:
It is Respondent's understanding that Kimberly Pruett-Barry has contacted the Bar and
disallowed any statements made by Neil J . Gillespie and attached as Exhibit "A" is an
email refuting that Ms. Kimberly Pruett-Barry is dissatisfied with my services.
Exhibit A referenced above is Ms. Pruett-Barrys email of Mon, J an 28, 2013 at 8:36 AM,
copy enclosed. Subsequently Ms. Pruett-Barry emailed me Monday, March 25, 2013 6:13 PM
refuting her statement in Exhibit A provided by Mr. Bauer. Ms. Pruett-Barry wrote:
From: "kim" <kimberlypruett@earthlink.net>
To: <neilgillespie@mfi.net>
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 6:13 PM
Subject: Whatever you need from me!
Neil!
I had to back off from your complaint because we had to keep Bauer as our Atty,
BUT NO MORE!! I will call Annemarie Craft first thing in the morning!
I fired Bauer today without even having another Atty to represent us and yes
it has been going on this long. He has failed to follow through on EVERYTHING,
yet he has racked up a bill that we will never be able to pay.
YOU ARE RIGHT IN EVERYTHING YOU SAY about Bauer following through on
ANYTHING and then when you ask him why something is not done it is ONE EXCUSE
AFTER ANOTHER!
I will be filing Arbitration throught the State Bar to get our fees back.
I am YOUR witness, USE ME!
Sincerely,
Kimberly Pruett
A copy of Ms. Pruett-Barrys above email is enclosed.
Also enclosed you will find the documents listed below from Ms. Pruett-Barrys lawsuit against
attorney Peter McGrath showing Mr. Bauer moved to withdrawal as counsel April 12, 2013.
The mediation report shows the case did not settle and an impasse was declared on all issues.
The case shows pending status on the Clerks website. The Register of Actions or docket
printed today shows Mr. Bauer stricken as counsel, and Order on Motion to Withdrawal as
Counsel entered May 13, 2013.
Barry vs. McGrath case no. 2012-CA-009323-O, Orange County, Florida
1. 03/06/13 Mediation Report. A mediation conference was conducted on March
6, 2013. The conference resulted in the following: 1. The case did not settle and
an impasse was declared as to all issues.
2. 04/12/13 Motion to Withdraw of Plaintiffs Attorney, Robert Bauer.
3. Register of Actions printed May 28, 2013.
4. Orange County Clerks website shows pending case status.
The foregoing court documents, along with Kim Barrys email to me March 25, 2013 (enclosed),
is evidence that Mr. Bauer is engaged in an ongoing pattern of misconduct, betrayal of his
clients, as stated in my letter March 28, 2013 to Gwynne Young, President of the Florida Bar:
Mr. Bauer may have discovered the perfect crime: He represents himself to clients as a
specialist in attorney malpractice, and once retained, bleeds the client of funds in a fake
representation that is intended to break the client, and intended to protect the subject
attorney. This looks like a pattern of racketeering that is aided and abetted by other
attorneys, such as Ryan Christopher Rodems, Eugene P. Castagliuolo, and Catherine
Barbara Chapman in my cases.
Today Donna McMahon of the Bar provided information for RFA 13-12396 by complainant
Kim Pruett was opened J anuary 25, 2013 and closed May 21, 2013, with no documents. Also
on May 21, 2013 I received email from Ms. Pruett-Barry with this message: (copy enclosed)
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 3:25 PM
Subject: Bauer
Hey Neil,
J ust wanted you to know that we FIRED Bauer, he is a SCUMBAG, charged us for
stuff he never did, lied to us, never carried through with anything.
J ust got off the phone with Ms. Craft and went into detail about some of the
stuff he did, she told me, actually BEGGED me to file a complaint.
I am filing the complaint first thing tomorrow.
Sincerely,
Kim Pruett
However The Florida Bar does not show at this time, in response to my query today, a complaint
from Ms. Pruett-Barry against Mr. Bauer.
My rebuttal to individually numbered responses by Mr. Bauer, by corresponding number:
1. Mr. Bauer is wrong. This is a new complaint, see page 1.
2. Mr. Bauer failed to respond, therefore the allegation is taken as admitted by Mr. Bauer.
4. Mr. Bauer is wrong. The evidence herein shows Ms. Pruett-Barry is not satisfied.
5. Mr. Bauer is wrong. The evidence herein shows Ms. Pruett-Barry is not satisfied.
7. Acknowledged grievance committee in the first complaint found no probable cause.
Unfortunately the grievance committee is a crony local discipline component as
describe by the American Bar Associations (ABA) McKay Report.
Local components, such as local bar investigative committees, foster cronyism
as well as prejudice against unpopular respondents. - ABA McKay Report
Local discipline components are a fatal defect in The Bars lawyer discipline system.
However, pursuant to Rule 3-7.3(a) bar counsel Annemarie Craft (ACAP) reviewed my
complaint/inquiry against Mr. Bauer and determined that the alleged conduct, if proven,
would constitute a violation of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar warranting the
imposition of discipline. Ms. Craft notified me (October 13, 2010) that she forwarded the
complaint to The Florida Bar's Tallahassee Branch Office for consideration. Ms. Craft
was the second bar counsel assigned; the initial bar counsel, William Kitchen, was
removed from the inquiry.
Pursuant to Rule 3-7.3(c) my complaint (J uly 29, 2010) was in writing and under oath,
although the response from Mr. Bauer, and a 13 page diatribe from attorney Ryan C.
Rodems were not made under oath. (Note: The Bauer and Rodems correspondence
contained a number of false statements and misrepresentations prejudicial to the
administration of justice.)
Pursuant to Rule 3-7.3(b) bar counsel J ames A G Davey, J r. in the Tallahassee Branch
Office decided to pursue an inquiry, opened a disciplinary file as a complaint, and
investigated the allegations contained in the complaint.
Pursuant to Rule 3-7.3(f) Mr. Davey referred the complaint (November 5, 2010) to
Melissa Murphy, Chair Eighth J udicial Circuit Grievance Committee "B" for its further
investigation. Mr. Davey instructed Ms. Murphy assign the complaint to a grievance
committee member for investigation and enclosed a Notice of Assignment of
Investigating Member and/or Panel form. Mr. Kramer was assigned as investigating
member (November 15, 2010.
8. Disagree that the Florida Bar complied with all requirements necessary to satisfy Rule 3-
7.4(k), see page 1, and my individual rebuttal at number 7 in its entirety.
9. Denied that Mr. Schwait responded appropriately. See my individual rebuttal at number 7
in its entirety.
10. Denied that Mr. Schwait responded appropriately. See my individual rebuttal at number 7
in its entirety.
13. Mr. Bauer failed to return my file. His charging lien is improper, see the Informational
Packet on Attorney Liens by the Florida Bar Ethics Department.
14. Mr. Bauer failed to comply with Rule 4-1.16(b).
15. There is no exception to my telephone recording policy for Mr. Bauer.
16. Mr. Bauer and Mr. Rodems engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity to subvert or
undermine my initial complaint against Bauer, file no. 2011-00,073 (8B) in violation of
Rules 4-8.4(c), 4-8.4(d), and Rule 4-8.3(a).
17. The Florida Bar has both the jurisdiction and a duty to investigate any breach of the
Rules of Professional Conduct, Rules 4-8.4(c), 4-8.4(d), and 4-8.3(a), by Mr. Rodems
and Mr. Bauer that facilitate or aid and abet racketing and/or obstruction of justice in
litigation and bar complaints.
18. The Florida Bar has both the jurisdiction and a duty to investigate any breach of the
Rules of Professional Conduct, Rules 4-8.4(c), 4-8.4(d), and 4-8.3(a), by Mr. Rodems
and Mr. Bauer that facilitate or aid and abet racketing and/or obstruction of justice in
litigation and bar complaints.
19. Mr. Bauer is wrong. The settlement agreement is worthless. Mr. Rodems is not the
Florida Attorney General, thereby making his representation of the State of Florida J une
21, 2011 in my federal lawsuit unlawful and unethical. Only the Attorney General of
Florida may represent the State of Florida in a federal court action, Fla. Const. Art IV
4, F.S. 16.01, and the holding of State ex rel. Shevin v. Weinstein. That is why J udge
Hodges did not grant Mr. Rodems motion(s) to assign my federal claims to Rodems and
his partners, and why J udge Hodges did not dismiss the case with prejudice.
20. The settlement agreement is worthless, see my rebuttal above in paragraph 19.
21. While the agreement is worthless (See 19), the cooperation between Messrs. Rodems,
Bauer, Castagliuolo and others shows a pattern of racketeering and/or obstruction of
justice to undermine litigation and bar complaints in violation of Rules 4-8.4(c), 4-8.4(d),
and Rule 4-8.3(a)
In rebuttal to Mr. Bauers response, pages 6 through 15 show Bauer failed to report misconduct
of Mr. Rodems, engaged in racketeering and/or obstruction of justice, was not competent (Rule
4-1.1) and not diligent (Rule 4-1.3) in his representation of me, in violation of the following:
Rule 4-1.1. Mr. Bauer is not competent.
Rule 4-1.3. Mr. Bauer is not diligent.
Rule 4-8.4(c). Mr. Bauer engaged in dishonesty, fraud, deceit, and misrepresentation.
Rule 4-8.4(d). Mr. Bauer engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.
Rule 4-8.3(a). Mr. Bauer failed to report misconduct of other lawyers, Mr. Rodems.
In rebuttal to Mr. Bauers response, the remaining portion of Page 16 through first half of Page
21 shows Bauer failed to report misconduct of Mr. Rodems, engaged in racketeering and/or
obstruction of justice, was not competent (Rule 4-1.1) and not diligent (Rule 4-1.3) in his
representation of me, in violation of the following:
Rule 4-1.1. Mr. Bauer is not competent.
Rule 4-1.3. Mr. Bauer is not diligent.
Rule 4-8.4(c). Mr. Bauer engaged in dishonesty, fraud, deceit, and misrepresentation.
Rule 4-8.4(d). Mr. Bauer engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.
Rule 4-8.3(a). Mr. Bauer failed to report misconduct of other lawyers, Mr. Rodems.
22. I rebut Mr. Bauers gratuitous and blanket denial of wrongdoing, and his failure to
respond to specific accusations showing he lied, misrepresented facts, or made
misleading legal arguments to the Florida Bar in his response dated August 18, 2010 to
my initial complaint, file no. 2011-00,073 (8B), contrary to Rule 4-8.4(c) and Rule 4-
8.4(d), and should be taken as a failure to respond and as an admission of his guilt.
25. Dr. Woodhull found Mr. Bauer not competent (Rule 4-1.1) and not diligent (Rule 4-1.3),
as set forth in her motion for sanctions against Bauer, docket entry December 18, 2009,
Estate of Louise A. Falvo, Case No: 01-2008-CP-1083, Eighth J udicial Circuit, Alachua
County, copy on request.
26. Dr. Woodhulls motion for sanctions (25) shows Mr. Bauers charging lien improper.
27. Mr. Bauer is not competent (Rule 4-1.1) and not diligent (Rule 4-1.3) and must rely on
others to perform legal work that he is not capable of producing, including the work of
law students and unlicensed law school graduates to draft his pleadings, as well as using
his clients pro se pleadings and submitting them to the court as his own work.
28. Dr. Woodhull recalls Mr. Bauer making the statement.
29. Exhibit A has been disproved, see above, and the enclosed email of Ms. Pruett-Barry
dated March 25, 2013 6:13 PM, Subject: Whatever you need from me!
30. A copy of Anna White Hodgess email is enclosed, help advise! I hired and fired
bauer..nightmare, Friday, J uly 08, 2011 10:56 AM, I plan to raise the ROOF off this mess!
31. A recording of Mr. Phillip Strauss phone call is available, and may be transcribed, that
will show Mr. Bauer not competent (Rule 4-1.1) and not diligent (Rule 4-1.3).
32. My knowledge of this complaint is limited, but I believe it shows an ongoing pattern that
Mr. Bauer is not competent (Rule 4-1.1) and not diligent (Rule 4-1.3).
In Summation
Mr. Bauer refused to permit me to attend or testify at hearings in my case because Mr. Rodems
would knowingly make comments to prod me for no better purpose than to anger you. Bauer
wrote me this email J uly 8, 2008 at 6.05 p.m. stating in part:
No - I do not wish for you to attend hearings. I am concerned that you will not be
able to properly deal with any of Mr. Rodems comments and you will enflame the
situation. I am sure that he makes them for no better purpose than to anger you. I
believe it is best to keep you away from him and not allow him to prod you.
An attorney who knowingly prods me with comments to anger and inflame me, and deny me
access to court in my case, is not an honorable and professional attorney suitable for judge as
Mr. Bauer recommended to Gov. Crist. Mr. Bauers inability to fashion a way for me to testify
shows he is not competent (Rule 4-1.1) and not diligent (Rule 4-1.3).
Mr. Castagliuolo admitted August 30, 2012 in a written response to Theodore P. Littlewood J r.,
Bar Counsel in TFB File No. 2013-10,162 (6D), that Mr. Rodems made an unsolicited offer to
Castagliuolo to assist him in any future Bar grievance from me. From page 3, 1:
My opposing counsel at Gillespie's deposition was Ryan Christopher Chris" Rodems.
Chris once remarked to me, unsolicited, that he would be happy to speak to The Florida
Bar on my behalf if Gillespie grieved me the way he did Bob Bauer.
This evidence shows how the lawyer discipline process in Florida is subverted and undermined,
here by Mr. Rodems, whos misconduct is at the center of this matter, through an ongoing breach
of Rules 4-8.4(c), 4-8.4(d), and 4-8.3(a), where lawyer-adversaries conspire to, and engage in,
conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, to obstruct justice and mislead
the Bar or its tribunal, to avoid discipline well in advance of any Bar complaint. This activity
raises an immediate conflict between the lawyer-adversaries and the lawyer representing the
client. If the misconduct is not reported as required under Rule 4-8.3(a), the client is not being
represented in a zealous, competent or diligent manner because the lawyer has a conflict with his
client created by the offer of assistance from opposing counsel in any future Bar complaint.
My letter May 16, 2013 to Kenneth Wilson, Assistant Attorney General, shows how David
Rowland of the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit misrepresented to Mr. Wilson that I did not provide
Mr. Rowland a copy of Petition No. 12-7747. A copy of the petition was provided to Gov. Scott
and AG Bondi May 24, 2013. This matter is ongoing.
Conclusion
Robert W. Bauer should be permanently disbarred. This is not a fee dispute. This complaint does
not seek refund of $19, 212 in fees paid him. My complaint against Mr. Bauer seeks permanent
disbarment for questions of ethics that caused me unremittable suffering and damages.
Thank you Ms. Craft for considering my rebuttal.
Under penalties of perjury, I declare that the foregoing facts are true, correct and complete.
Sincerely,
Neil J . Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
cc: Robert W. Bauer, via U.P.S. No. 1Z64589FP297424766
---------------
112&'13 GnWl Per d Neil Gillespie
--
Per Complaint of Neil Gillespie
Idm <kimbet1ypruett@earthtink.net>
Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 8:36 AM
Reply-To: kim <kimbertypruett@earthlink.net>
To: "rwb@bauertegal.com" <rwb@bauer1egal.com>
Dear Sirs/Madam,
Mr. Neil Gillespie is using my name WITHOUT my pennission in a complaint against
Robert Bauer, AttyI with the Florida State Bar.
Please be seNsed that I am satisfied with Mr. Bauer's representation of our case and
in no way want to be associated with Gillespie and this complaint.
I will also be discussing this matter with MaryAnn Crawford.
Thank you,
Kim Pruett
it'1bcdth=13c81518b4b9c54a

J A

Neil Gillespie
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 6:13 PM
Subject: Whatever you need from me!
Page 1of 1
3/28/2013
Neil!

I had to back off from your complaint because we had to keep Bauer as our Atty,
BUT NO MORE!! I will call Annemarie Craft first thing in the morning!

I fired Bauer today without even having another Atty to represent us and yes
it has been going on this long. He has failed to follow through on EVERYTHING,
yet he has racked up a bill that we will never be able to pay.

YOU ARE RIGHT IN EVERYTHING YOU SAY about Bauer following through on
ANYTHING
and then when you ask him why something is not done it is ONE EXCUSE AFTER ANOTHER!

I will be filing Arbitration throught the State Bar to get our fees back.

I am YOUR witness, USE ME!

Sincerely,
Kimberly Pruett
IN' l'HE OF THE
CIRCUIT, IN AN'D
FO'R ORANGE FLORIDA
CASE 2012-CA-009323-0
KIMBERLy 'BA.R.RY and
WILIJ.A.M B,ARR'y,

VSf
PEl'ER R. MCGRAl'H" et aL
I)efendants,
----------------_/
MEIlIA.TION DISPOSITION REPORT
A mediation confercllce was COllducted on March 6,2013. TIle conferenc.e res'ulted in the
followillg:
1. The case did not settle and an 1m.passe was decla.red as to all issues.
/-14. It/;. /
DATED tllis *D day , 2013.
"t-
o
suo ed, . !J, //!
Q.)
( !:)
u
o

(1)
.c
+-'
1)0 Bo'x ,60354 C
Orlando, FL 32856 ../
(407) 926-8708
cc: Counsel of Record
Electronically Filed 04/12/2013 01: 12:36 PM ET
IN THE CIRCmT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA
Case No.: 2012-CA-009323-0
KlMBERLYPRUETI BARRY and
WILLIAM BARRY,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
PETER R. MCGRATH and
PETER R. MCGRATH, P.A.
t
Defendant.
_______- --..;1
PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF COUNSEL
Movant, Robert W. Bauer
t
Esq., Attorney for Plaintiffs, Kimberly Pruett Barry and
William Barry, files this Motion for Withdrawal ofCounsel and alleges the following:
1. Good cause exists for withdrawal of Movant as counsel because Plaintiffs consent
to this withdrawaL Said consent is evidenced by Plaintiffs' signatures affixed hereto.
2. The settings and deadlines in this case are as follows: NONE.
3. This Motion is not sought for the purposes of delay.
4. A copy of this Motion bearing the enclosed notice has been delivered to the last
known addresses of Plaintiffs.
Kimberly Pruett Barry
5525 SW 80th Place
Ocala, FL 34476
William Barry
5525 SW 80th Place
Ocala, FL 34476
5. Plaintiffs are hereby notified in writing of the right to object to this motion.
NOTICE
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT THIS MOTION FOR
WITHDRAWAL OF COUNSEL MAY BE SET FOR HEARING AT THE
TIME AND PLACE TO YET BE DETERMINED. YOU DO NOT HAVE
TO AGREE TO THIS MOTION. IF YOU WISH TO CONTEST THE
WITHDRAWAL OF ROBERT W. BAUER, ESQ. AS YOUR ATTORNEY,
YOU SHOULD APPEAR AT TIlE HEARING. IF YOU DO NOT
OPPOSE ROBERT W. BAUER, ESQ.'S WITHDRAWAL AS YOUR
ATTORNEY, PLEASE SIGN BELOW ACKNOWLEDGING YOUR
CONSENT TO TIDS MOTION.
6. This Motion is based on the above stated reason(s), in addition to any evidence
offered at hearing on this matter.
WHEREFORE, Movant requests that the Court enter an order discharging Movant as
attorney of record for Plaintiffs, Kimberly Pruett Barry and William Barry, and grant such other
and further reliefthat may be awarded at law or in equity.
Date: _
Kimberly Pruett Barry
Date: _
William Barry
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on APR 122013 ,a copy of this Motion was electronically
served on William E. Lawton, Esq. at Wlawton@drml-law.com and at Marla@drml-law.com,
and the electronic transmission was completed.
Ro . Bauer, Esq.
Florida Bar No. 011058
The Law Office ofRobert W. Bauer, P.A.
2815 NW 13th Street, Suite 200E
Gainesville, FL 32609
Tel. (352) 375-5960 I Fax (352) 337-2518
E-MaU
Service - RWB.Pleadings@Bauerlegal.com
Scheduling - RWB.Scheduling@Bauerlegal.com
Correspondence - RWB@Bauerlegal.com
Service will not be accepted at any other email
other than the above service address. *
c: Jessica Padin, Judicial Assistant at ctjajpl@ocnjcc.or
l4J 001
SPlrl NT
04/12/13 08:49 FAX 3523518238
're:E TIME AND PLACE TO YET BE DETERMINED. YOLJ DO
NOlI HAVE TO AGREE TO THIS MOnON. IF YOU WISEI TO
CO:NTEST THE WITHDRAWAL OF ROBERT W.
ol'8 YOUR ATIORNEY, YOU SHOULD APPEAR AT ::m
:OEi\.RING. IF YOU DO NOT OPPOSE ROBERT W.
WITHDRAWAL AS YOUR ATTORNEY, PLEASE !r:GN
BEI,OW ACKNOWLEDGING YOUR CONSENT TO 'rillS
MOTION.
. 6. This Motion is based on the above stated reason(s), in addi ion to any
evidence ofi:;ered at hearing on this matter.
Movant requests that the Court enter an ordet :lischarging
,Movant attorney of record for Plaintitfs, Kimberly Pruett Barry and and
igrant such o1her and further relief that may be awarded at law or in equity.
Date: L.. :.J.3.
Date: _'f..-r"_I_/lo I
CEl\IIFIcA'tE OF
I certi:tY that on 1 a copy of this ,tion was
electtonicnlly served on William E. Lawton, Esq. at and at
Marla@dtml:law. CQ!lb and the electronic was completed.
Robert W. Bauer, Esq.
Florida Bar No. 011058
The Law Office ofRobert W. Bauert l' .A.
281SNW13th Street, Suite 200E
Gainesville, FL 32609
Tel. (352) 3755960 I Fax (352) 3371 18
E-Mail
Service-
Scheduling
Correspondence
2
Search Menu New Civil Search Refine Search Back Location : Orange County
REGISTER OF ACTIONS
CASE NO. 2012-CA-009323-O
BARRY, KIMBERLY PRUETTet al. vs. MCGRATH, PETER Ret al.
Case Type:
CA - Malpractice - Other
Professional
Date Filed: 06/04/2012
Location: Div 40
J udicial Officer: Mihok, A Thomas
Uniform Case Number: 482012CA009323A001OX
PARTY INFORMATION
Lead Attorneys
Defendant MCGRATH, PETER R WILLIAM EDWARD LAWTON,
Esquire
Retained
407-422-4310(W)

Defendant PETER R MCGRATH PA WILLIAM EDWARD LAWTON,
Esquire
Retained
407-422-4310(W)

Plaintiff BARRY, KIMBERLY PRUETT ROBERT W BAUER, Esquire
Retained
352-375-5960(W)

Plaintiff BARRY, WILLIAM ROBERT W BAUER, Esquire
Retained
352-375-5960(W)
EVENTS & ORDERS OF THE COURT

OTHER EVENTS AND HEARINGS
05/13/2013

Order on Motion to Withdraw as Counsel
for pltf
05/01/2013

Certified Copy Issued
Plain copies of 4 documents ($6.00) - mailed to customer in SASE
04/30/2013 Letter
04/12/2013

Motion to Withdraw
of Pltfs Atty
03/06/2013

CANCELED Motion (11:15 AM) (J udicial Officer Mihok, A Thomas)
Cancelled
03/06/2013

Mediation Report
Mediation Report
03/04/2013

Notice of Cancellation
02/18/2013

Notice of Mediation
Notice of Mediation
01/17/2013

Letter
COPY REQUEST
01/17/2013

Copy/Copies
REQUESTED DOCUMENTS MAILED TO CUSTOMER $3.00
01/11/2013

Notice of Hearing
NOTICE OF HEARING
12/13/2012

10/29/2012

Notice of Hearing
12/17/12 2:00 pm
08/24/2012

Joint Stipulation
AS TO PRE-TRIAL DEADLINES AND TRIAL DATE
08/20/2012

Notice
of Designation of E-Mail Addresses
08/14/2012

Notice of Compliance
AND DESIGNATION OF ELECTRONIC MAIL ADDRESSES
07/26/2012 Motion for Mediation
07/26/2012 Letter
07/23/2012

Order
OF REFERRAL TO MEDIATION
http://myclerk.myorangeclerk.com/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=8108079
1 of 2 5/28/2013 2:20 PM
07/12/2012

Order Granting Telephonic Appearance
deposition of Cheryl Weisman and David Henry, Esq
07/12/2012

Letter
to Judge
06/27/2012

Response
TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF TELEPHONE DEPOSITIONS
06/27/2012 Letter
06/25/2012

Motion
for Approval of Telephone Depositions
06/06/2012

Notice of Transfer
ORG TO FILE; COPY MAILED TO DEF VIA REGULAR MAIL; COPY MAILED TO ATTY SASE
06/04/2012 Receipt of Transfer
06/04/2012 Receipt of Transfer
06/01/2012

Complete Case Transferred
Part 1 of 8
06/01/2012

Part 2 of 8
06/01/2012

Part 4 of 8
06/01/2012

Part 5 of 8
06/01/2012

Part 6 of 8
06/01/2012

Part 8 of 8
06/01/2012

Part 3 of 8
06/01/2012

Part 7 of 8
06/01/2012 Notice of Transfer
FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Plaintiff BARRY, KIMBERLY PRUETT
Total Financial Assessment 415.00
Total Payments and Credits 409.00
Balance Due as of 05/28/2013 6.00

06/04/2012 Transaction Assessment 400.00
06/05/2012 Counter Payment Receipt #CV-2012-39566 BAUER, ROBERT W, Esquire (400.00)
02/06/2013 Counter Payment Receipt #CV-2013-09323 . (3.00)
05/02/2013 Mail Payments Receipt #CV-2013-28119 ANONYMOUS (6.00)

http://myclerk.myorangeclerk.com/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=8108079
2 of 2 5/28/2013 2:20 PM
Search Menu New Civil Search Refine Search Location : Orange County
Record Count: 5
Search By: Party Exact Name: on Party Search Mode: Name Last Name: mcgrath First Name: peter Case Status: All Sort By: Filed Date
Case Number Style
Filed/Location/Judicial
Officer
Type/Status
1999-CC-006780-O MCGRATH, PETER R vs. BECK, ROBERT L et al 07/15/1999
Div 72
Martinez, Wilfredo
CC - Breach of Contract
Closed - SRS
2004-SC-003392-O MCGRATH, PETER R vs. FOREST RIDGE AT
WOODS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC,
04/21/2004
Div 72
Martinez, Wilfredo
SC - Goods Sold/Indebtedness
Closed - SRS
2008-CA-033873-O MCGRATH, PETER R vs. TVS INC, 12/23/2008
Div 33
Egan, Robert J
CA - Breach of Agreement/Con
Pending
2011-SC-007721-O HAVET, J ANET vs. MCGRATH, PETER 10/24/2011
Div 73
Allen, Faye L
SC - Replevin up to $1000 (effe
Closed - SRS
2012-CA-009323-O BARRY, KIMBERLY PRUETTet al. vs. MCGRATH,
PETER Ret al.
06/04/2012
Div 40
Mihok, A Thomas
CA - Malpractice - Other Profes
Pending
http://myclerk.myorangeclerk.com/Search.aspx?ID=201&NodeID=100,10...
1 of 1 5/28/2013 2:26 PM

Neil Gillespie
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 3:25 PM
Subject: Bauer
Page 1of 1
5/28/2013
Hey Neil,

J ust wanted you to know that we FIRED Bauer, he is a SCUMBAG, charged us for
stuff he never did, lied to us, never carried through with anything.

J ust got off the phone with Ms. Craft and went into detail about some of the
stuff he did, she told me, actually BEGGED me to file a complaint.

I am filing the complaint first thing tomorrow.

Sincerely,
Kim Pruett

Neil Gillespie
From: "Anna Hodges" <annahodges77@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, J uly 08, 2011 10:56 AM
Subject: help advise! I hired and fired bauer..nightmare
Page 1of 1
7/8/2011
Dear Mr. Gillespie,
My name is Anna Hodges. I was servered a redicoulous defamation complaint filed by my
husbands ex wife.
Naturally she made sure it was served a few weeks before Christmas. I had a hard tim finding an
attorney during that time so ened up with Bauer.
Now i know WHY he was a vailable at christmas.
The EX's case which is frivolous was dismissed with leave to ammend. After her attorney
ammended my attorney had 10 days to answer.
I didn't even know there was a hearing or about the 10 days i was in the process of trying to find
another attorney for many OTHER bauer office issues.
Anyway i finally got rid of him, it too over a month, and now the case is allowed to continue due
to HIS neglagence. I have more to this story but must run ,
another meeting with my new attorney trying to help fix this mess.
I would like to talk with you, if you have the time.
I plan to raise the ROOF off this mess!
Thank -you
Anna Hodges
352-949-2733
or email
VIA U.P.S. No. 1Z64589FP294626428 May 16, 2013
and kenneth.wilson@myfloridalegal.com
Kenneth V. Wilson, Assistant Attorney General
Civil Litigation Bureau -Tampa
Office of the Attorney General
501 E Kennedy Blvd., Suite 1100
Tampa, Florida 33602
RE: Missing Public Records, Gillespie v. Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, Florida, et al.
Petition No. 12-7747 for Writ of Certiorari, Supreme Court of the United States
Dear Mr. Wilson:
So sorry to see you got duped by court counsel David Rowland and paralegal Sandra Burge, who
misrepresented to you that I did not provide Mr. Rowland a copy of Petition No. 12-7747. That
must explain why the petition was not among the 323 pages of public records provided by your
office that arrived here in Ocala May 9, 2013 in response to my records request.
An email (Exhibit 1) from Mr. Rowlands paralegal Sandra Burge to Chief Assistant Attorney
General Diana R. Esposito 12/20/2012 at 12:51 PM, Cc to David Rowland and Chris Nauman,
advanced this material falsehood, which Ms. Esposito sent to you, Cc to Amanda Cavanaugh:
The Plaintiff's Notice of Filing the petition for writ of certiorari was received in the Legal
Department's Office on 12/18/12 is attached as well as the Court's docket indicating a
response is due, if needed, by J anuary 14, 2013. Neither a copy of the petition nor
"separate Volume Appendices" accompanied the Notice.
A letter (Exhibit 2) emailed by you J anuary 8, 2013 repeated the falsehood back to Mr. Rowland:
While Plaintiff did not provide a copy of his Petition....
On December 10, 2012 I served Mr. Rowland per Rule 29, proof of service, the following:
1. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of the United States,
2. Rule 39 motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis
3. Rule 29 proof of service, December 10, 2012
4. Compact Disk (CD) containing PDF files of the separate volume appendices.
5. My cover letter to the Clerk of the U.S. Supreme Court, December 10, 2012
United Parcel Service (UPS) tracking 1Z64589FP297520287 shows delivery December 11, 2012
at 10:55 AM to the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, 800 E. Twiggs Street, Tampa, Florida 34481.
FYI, all UPS ground shipping within Florida is delivered next day, unless shipped on Friday.
The UPS proof of delivery for 1Z64589FP297520287 December 11, 2012 shows DAVIS at
the front desk signed for the delivery, and shows an image of the signature D. Davis. A seven
(7) page composite of the UPS proof of delivery and tracking documents is enclosed. (Exhibit 3).
Kenneth V. Wilson, Assistant Attorney General May 16, 2013
Office of the Attorney General Page - 2
The document referred to by Ms. Burge in her deceptive email to Ms. Esposito was a Rule 12.3
notice, and notice of waiver to file a response, delivered December 18, 2012 at 10:44 AM to the
Thirteenth J udicial Circuit. Unfortunately Ms. Burge, Mr. Rowland, and Mr. Nauman failed to
inform you that my petition was delivered a week earlier, December 11, 2012 at 10:55 AM.
The Thirteenth Circuit gang further mislead you by providing you my December 10, 2012 cover
letter to the Clerk of the Supreme Court which they date-stamped December 18, 2012, when this
letter was in fact a second courtesy copy of the one received by Rowland December 11, 2012 but
does not appear date-stamped as such in the records your office provided me May 9, 2013.
Enclosed you will find evidence showing I served by UPS the Rule 12.3 notice, and notice of
waiver to Mr. Rowland December 17, 2012 tracking no. 1Z64589FP291778029, which was
delivered December 18, 2012 at 10:44 AM, to the Courts address, 800 E. Twiggs Street, Tampa,
Florida. The UPS proof of delivery shows DAVIS at the front desk signed for the delivery. A
composite of the UPS proof of delivery and tracking documents is enclosed. (Exhibit 4).
The Supreme Court sent me three (s) sets of Rule 12.3 notices, and notices of waiver to file a
response, December 14, 2013 after my petition was docketed, with instructions for notifying
opposing counsel(s) that the case was docketed. (Exhibit 5).
You have my sympathy for any embarrassment caused by the deception of Mr. Rowland and his
accomplices, that caused an inaccurate letter to issue from the Office of the Attorney General
falsely implying I did not provide a copy of my petition to Mr. Rowland. (Exhibit 2).
Enclosed you will find my records request to Mr. Rowland intended to correct the record. If and
when I get an accurate response back, I will provide you the correct date-stamped petition for
inclusion in the record showing it was received by Mr. Rowland December 11, 2012.
Until then you can find Petition No. 12-7747 online at the link below. Thank you.
http://nosueorg.blogspot.com/2012/12/petition-for-writ-of-certiorari-to.html
Sincerely,
Neil J . Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
Enclosures
cc: Gov. Rick Scott, via U.P.S. No. 1Z64589FP290544836
cc: Attorney General Pam Bondi, via U.P.S. No. 1Z64589FP294245643
Email to: Gov. Scott, AG Bondi, AAG Esposito, ABA service list; Florida Bar service list; Mr.
Anderson, Chair, Thirteenth Circuit J NC; Sixth Circuit Grievance Committee D, Thirteenth
Circuit BOG, David Rowland, K. Christopher Nauman, Sandra Burge.
VIA U.P.S. No. 1Z64589FP297024724 (Gov. Scott) May 24, 2013
VIA U.P.S. No. 1Z64589FP296600737 (AG Bondi)
Governor Rick Scott Attorney General Pam Bondi
Office of Governor Rick Scott Office of Attorney General
State of Florida, The Capitol State of Florida
400 S. Monroe St. The Capitol PL-01
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0001 Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050
RE: Missing Public Records, Gillespie v. Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, Florida, et al.
Petition No. 12-7747 for Writ of Certiorari, Supreme Court of the United States
Dear Governor Scott and Attorney General Bondi:
Please find enclosed copies of Petition No. 12-7747. Unfortunately David Rowland, General
Counsel for the Thirteenth J udicial Circuit, Florida, et al., mislead Kenneth V. Wilson, Assistant
Attorney General, when Mr. Rowland misrepresented that I did not provide him a copy of
Petition No. 12-7747. Enclosed is a copy of my letter (only) to Mr. Wilson of May 16, 2013.
Also enclosed is my public records request (only) to Mr. Rowland, which so far he has not
responded to, or acknowledged. In lieu of the date-stamped petition from Mr. Rowland, I have
provided separately to each of you a computer copy of Petition No. 12-7747. If Mr. Rowland
ever provides the date-stamped petition I requested from him, I will provide you each a copy.
Unfortunately the Attorney Generals Synopsis of Major Issues in Petition No. 12-7747, found
in the enclosed two-page AG Case #Tampa Monitor, is not factually accurate. I attribute the
errors to Mr. Rowlands falsehoods to Ms. Esposito and Mr. Wilson about the petition.
I will respond directly to Ms. Esposito about the Synopsis of Major Issues in the AG Case
#Tampa Monitor, to accurately inform and correct the record in Petition No. 12-7747.
Thank you for considering this matter affecting Floridas consumers of legal and court services.
Sincerely,
Neil J . Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
Enclosures
Cc: Diana R. Esposito, Chief-Assistant Attorney General, 501 East Kennedy Blvd., Suite 1100
Tampa, FL 33602, via U.P.S. No. 1Z64589FP297792743; and email.
Cc email: ABA service list; the Florida Bar service list; Mr. Anderson, Chair, Thirteenth Circuit
J NC; Sixth Circuit Grievance Committee D, Thirteenth Circuit BOG; David Roland, et al.
THE FLORIDA BAR
651 EAST JEFFERSON STREET
JOHN F. HARKNESS, JR. TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-2300 850/561-5600
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WWW.FLORIDABAR.ORG
March 14, 2013
Mr. Neil J. Gillespie
8092 S.W. 115Th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
Re: Complaint by Neil J. Gillespie against Robert W. Bauer
The Florida Bar File No. 2013-00,540 (8B)
Dear Mr. Gillespie:
Enclosed you will find Mr. Robert W. Bauer's response to your complaint. The response sent by Mr.
Bauer indicated that a copy was being mailed to you. However based on your recent email to The Florida
bar it appears that you did not receive you copy of Mr. Bauer's response.
If you wish to file a rebuttal to the response, please do so in writing by April 1, 2013. Additionally, you
must send a copy to Mr. Bauer.
Sincerely,
Annemarie Craft, Bar Counsel
Attorney Consumer Assistance Program
ACAP Hotline 866-352-0707
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Robert W. Bauer
The Law OHices of
Robert W. Bauer, P.A.
2815 NW 13th Street, Suite 200E, Gainesville, FL 32609
www.bauerlegal.com
Robert W Bauer, Esq. Phone: (352)375.5960
Maria Perez YoungbJood7 Esq.
Timothy C Youngblood, Esq. Fax: (352)337.2518
February 9, 2013
Annemarie Craft
Florida Bar Association

6I5 East Jefferson Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2300
lf1l FEB 1B 2013 llJ)
11Ie Ronde B8r - ACAP
Re: Complaint by Neil J. Gillespie
T.......,FIorida
Florida Bar File No. 2013-00,540 (8B)
Dear Ms. Craft:
In order to appropriately respond to the complaint alleged by Neil J. Gillespie, I have numbered
the paragraphs of the complaint and have included a copy attached hereto for the Bar's
convenience.
I. This is not a new complaint; this is a complaint that repeats similar allegations
previously addressed by the Florida Bar and deternlined that the Respondent did not
engage in any unethical activity.
2. No substantive statements made in paragraph; therefore, no response.
4. It is Respondent's understanding that Kimberly Pruett-Barry has contacted the Bar
and disallowed any statements made by Neil J. Gillespie and attached as Exhibit
"A" is an email refuting that Ms. Kimberly Pruett-Barry is dissatisfied with my
services.
5. See answer to number 4.
7. Acknowledgment of previous complaint was made and it was determined to be
unfounded.
Page 1 of3
8. Respondent believes that the Florida Bar complied with all requirements necessary
to satisfy Rule 3-7.4(k).
9. Respondent believes that Mr. Schwait responded appropriately.
10. Respondent believes that Mr. Schwait responded appropriately.
11. Response is not warranted.
12. No substantive claims made in paragraph; therefore, no response.
13. There are outstanding fees owed to the finn that the Petitioner has not paid and
Respondent has properly executed a charging lien upon files held with the Law
Office ofRobert W. Bauer.
14. No substantive issues stated relating to ethic violations.
15. No substantive issues stated relating to ethic violations.
16. Relates to civil actions not within the purview of the Florida Bar.
17. Relates to civil actions not within the purview of the Florida Bar.
18. Relates to civil actions not within the pwview ofthe Florida Bar.
19. The issues of the settlement agreement procured by Mr. Rodems have been litigated
in Federal Court and found to binding and appropriate. This is not a matter of
ethics to be put before the Florida Bar.
20. The settlement, in no way, resolved the charging lien exercised by this finn. It
simply released any claim Mr. Gillespie had against the Respondent and the
Respondent's finn. The Settlement Agreement was between Mr. Rodems and Mr.
Gillespie. Mr. Rodems did not have the authority to release any claims of this law
office.
21. It is not appropriate at this time for the Respondent to advise the Petitioner on legal
matters.
Pages 6 through 15 consists of rehashing allegations previously addressed in the Bar
complaint. No additional responses at this time.
Remaining portion of Page 16 through frrst half of Page 21 were addressed in first
complaint.
22. Respondent denies any allegations of lying, misrepresenting the facts, or misleading
the Florida Bar.
23. Respondent denies any allegations ofmisrepresenting or making false statement.
Page 2 of3
24. Respondent denies any allegations ofmisrepresentation.
25. Angela Woodhull is fonner client who terminated our services because she could
not continue to afford our services. Ms. Woodhull had numerous cases and we had
to manage all of them. We had just won a complicated venue issue before Ms.
Woodhull terminated our services. I do not know why she would be displeased
with our services.
26. This finn did assert charging liens against Ms. Woodhull's cases, but they were not
improper.
27. Respondent admits that this office has used law students and graduate law students
to assist in drafting pleadings and research. This is a common practice and is not
unethical. It is, in fact, encouraged as a mentoring process.
28. Respondent does not recall making any such statement.
29. See Exhibit "A."
30. No substantive claims made to be able to respond to, and cannot reasonably respond
to the allegation without a waiver of attorney-client privilege.
31. Phillip Strauss is a previous complaint. This case was handled by an associate of
the finn and was not handled by myself. This complaint has been reviewed by the
Florida Bar and it was determined that there was no violation.
32. This is a complaint that was reviewed by the Florida Bar and it was detennined that
there was no ethical violation. The complaint was closed because the statute of
limitation expired prior to our finn handling. I did this case at no charge.
In conclusion, Mr. Gillespie's complaint is nothing more than a rehashing of previous complaints
wherein it has been detemlined that there was no cause and is a waste of the Florida Bar's time.
Mr. Gillespie has filed numerous federal actions, state actions, and now, Supreme Court actions,
all of which have been dismissed or will be dismissed shortly.
W. Bauer, Esq.
1-/
Enclosures as stated.
cc: Neil J. Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
Page 3 of3
---------------
112&'13 GnWl Per d Neil Gillespie
--
Per Complaint of Neil Gillespie
Idm <kimbet1ypruett@earthtink.net>
Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 8:36 AM
Reply-To: kim <kimbertypruett@earthlink.net>
To: "rwb@bauertegal.com" <rwb@bauer1egal.com>
Dear Sirs/Madam,
Mr. Neil Gillespie is using my name WITHOUT my pennission in a complaint against
Robert Bauer, AttyI with the Florida State Bar.
Please be seNsed that I am satisfied with Mr. Bauer's representation of our case and
in no way want to be associated with Gillespie and this complaint.
I will also be discussing this matter with MaryAnn Crawford.
Thank you,
Kim Pruett
it'1bcdth=13c81518b4b9c54a

J A
--------------------
Pursuant to Rule 3-7.1(f)) Rules of Discipline, you must execute the appropriate disclosure
paragraph below and return the form to this office by JaD." 22, 1013. The role provides that
the nature of the charges be stated in the notice to your fnm; however, we suggest that you attach
a copy ofthe complaint
CERTIFICATE OF DISCLOSURE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this (I day of # ~ 7. ,201----, a true copy of
the foregoing disclosure was furnished to A,t... (<<1.Il'j I.t"D c.I ,a member of
my present law finn of L I t ~ eM", vi ~ , ~ tV. B Q , ~ , and
t
ifdifferent
t
to , a member ofthe lawfinn of
t with which I was associated
at the time ofthe act(s) giving rise to the complaint in The Florida Bar File No. 2013-00
t
540
(8B).
CERTIFICATE OF DISCLOSURE
(Corporate/Government Employment)
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day of , 201-, a true copy of
the foregoing disclosure was furnished to my supervisor
at (name ofageocy), with
which I was associated at the time ofthe act(s) giving rise to the complaint in The Florida Bar
File No. 2013-00,540 (8B).
Robert W. Bauer
CERTIFICATE OF NON-LAW FIRM AFFILIATION
(Sole Practitioner)
I HEREBY CERTIFY to The Florida Bar on this day of , 201_,
that I am not presently affiliated with a law fum and was not affiliated with a law finn at the time
ofthe act(s) giving rise to the complaint in The Florida Bar File No. 2013..00,540 (8B).
Robert W. Bauer
Attorney Consumer Propam OCtober 31, 2012
The Florida Bill'
651 East .JoJYenon Street
FL 32399-2300
Cquplllgt _in"attgmpy Bphert W. Btu... Florida 8Ir m 11051
2815 NW 13tb S1reet, Suite 20GB, FL 32609. teIepbone (352) 37''960
,
LNft campl"'t An'. Robert w.II.aI:
This is a new complaint apat Mr. BlUet for mJsconduct dIriq aod after his repraICII1IItio of
mo in gUleapje Ye 8Idq;r. Rodmw & Cook. PA. et _ 110. Hilillborouah Co.
This DDW complaint seeks dilCiplme for Mr. Bauar'._1amnot .eJdnl retum of
$19).12 in fees peid to him!. l1tis complaint is aboutjusdce. SiDce 20111 JeamedMr. Bauer has
burt lot of aood, honest people: Hil own 80mBofdle suniYon ofMr. Bauer'1
milCODduct have contacted and their infonniIioft ia provided in thi. compIaiaL
I
Mr. Bluer's former clieall tell a aimillr story: Mr. B... is not be is not eIll._ he
takes the client'. money, ..he fails to CGmpIete the ...uer. A.umber oftile COIIlpllJnina
lJ) cllentl are disahled lIIdIar elderly, show'"pdIlm ofdisnpnt by Bauer to..m elderly and
disabled c:lJcnta. Mr. Bauer UlCS pro Ie pleadinp. hi. own. acl die work oflaw ItUdentl,
which be submitl to the court. his 0WIl pledap, ICCOftIkw to a motioD filed by fonDer
Bauer gliOl1t Dr. Anpla Woodhull. This was m)"experitDce with Mr. Bau. too.
On October 2012 Bauer client Kimberly PrueII-Bar!)' called me cIaimiDa be W8I DOt di1iaent.
G> Ms. Pruett-Barry lOcI IaJsbend William lelained Bluer to _1D01ber lawyer. PeIIlr R. McOnth.
Kim BID)' told me 1'. 61ck, &Ick 10 JlDIIIIJCh, ,111M II """ llirilrg ,,*gtty, aad tbIt
Mr. Bauer had nm up $40.000 bill and lOOk all the gouplctvilas.
,
AacoKlinl 10 Kiln Barryt their cue is limit. to mine iR Ibat they IUId 1beir former laW)'. for
Kim Slya Mr. Bauer it miUdna his clieD, chUllliDa -.and not pUina reIUItI.
emailedmeItltlna.Baut H._jlnlt.lyjtJllllo-MOWtlctI#jDrwanI...lllrblk III l11e8 to
ract", a biU. B...did the same with me too. The ncont in my cue &boWl Mr. Bauer', lack of
& Iaok ofdiUpnce IIlpreci Judie Barton. The public needs proteedOIl hill Bauer.
Finally, it IppCIIIB Mr. Bauer may be col1lbontiDa with Mr. bdems and Mr. CIIaaIluolo in
pattern of ncketeerinIlCtivit)' to UDdennine the:'oUowina BIr complaiDti aDd obstNct jusOce:
@ Eupac P Cutqliuolo, File No. 2013..10.162 (60)
RyIft Christopber Rodems. File No.. (138)
Mr. Castaal1aolo even provided copies orbi. filiDp.....-to the Florida IW ID cbe
abovo complaiatto Mr. Bauor and Rodems." IDcIItaed by the ablnYi8tioa "cc:"
precediDa names. suuesdnJ this mckelceri.,lCtivity is euand)' onsoUa.
I
I Mr.... me 131.163 In 1"" feel. Mucb oftH..-y or sa pmUadw. iIabIdiaI aaltllO
.................1y4ocl....judicata, ..lS.fOG" nwi Alto. Bluet __tied ........
--plaint ho SJ9t212 pUt 10S ray SoaiaI BeouriIJ clilabiUt, 0/1 honowlll 011
credit anti or ....... euJiect toea Jmpqw.aame, U..
The Florida 8Ir,. complaint IpinstRobert w. October 31,2012
Repraentation 1Jmellne 01Robm Bauer
FebftIIIY 26, 2007. Refmal to Mr. Bauerfor. libel by the Florida BIt 1JtS Refertll Sentice.
Mardll, 2007. initial $25 LRS consultadon wiIh Mr. Bauer It hiI ofllco.
I
March I, 2007. Paid Mr. Bauer 13,000 on credit CIrd 10 review my pro lawsuit
April 2, 2001. NOIicc ofAppeermce by Mr. Bauer in 05-CA.nos, HiRIborouIb Co.. PL.
Apr1124. 2007. Mr. Bauer and 1executed 1ft fee COIIIIct (S25O per hour).
March 31, 2001. Mr. Bauer propolld new....tion caatnct with hip.COItB; _lined.
October 13.2001. Mr. Bluet IDOved to withdrawal ill 05.cA720S: pmtod 0-09-2009.
October 13, 2_. Mr. Baler moved 10 witbdraMlIn 2008-2224; DENIED 0cI-30-2008.
0cI0ber 27,2001. Sutmittoct my ADA diu.bllliy recJlIfI'IllO Mr. Bauer: DO IeIpOIWIrefuled.
Oetober 30, 2008. Order in 2008-2224. 8luer'1 motion to withdraw COUDIOI DBNIED.
Mach9, 2009. Mr. Bauer lUbrnitted but dicllIOt lip a ccninaent fee dec!IMcL
Mach 9t 2009. Mr. Baber demanded Ilian .etdcmeat apcment for his 1IIIIpractice; dec1iDed.
May 14
t
2009. My proposed. continpnt fee apemont to Mr. Bauer; DO MIpOIIIOInIIIod.
May 2009. My pavposed ICttIenaeat qrcanaat to Mr. Bluer; DO respcmelretlJIed.
OCtober 1.2009. He.inI on Modon to WkhCIrawII. OS-CA-7205.......- an my coDSellt.
October 9. 2009. ORIcrOrautina Motion To Witbdrawa1 At CounIeL 05.cA-7205.
November 23, 2009. Mr. BauerldviJedofSI2,6S0clwaiDllien; S19,212 wupaidto B.....
October 23, 2012. Karen Kelly advised Mr. 8au bel DOC paid his 12%US roo; 12305.49.
Previously I made complaint no. 2011-00,073 (IJ) apm_ Mr.. Bauer that ... elaM M.m II,
2011 whm JIIneI N. Watson. Jr ChfetBtIICh DiIoipliDc CounIoI, iuued LeUer RIpolt
Pursuant to Rule 3-7.4(k) ofNo ProbIbJe CaUle FiDdiDI- The letter 1tatecI: (ExbiJit 1).
I
to Rule 3-7.4(k), tbil document setVOIli Letter Report ofNa I'nJbdtIe CauIa
On 1ho basis of. dilipllt aacI itnpIl1iallD&1ylll of11l1be iofomWlOft avai1IbIe.
OIl.Marcb 15,2011, lite Fievanee conunIItee found DO]JIOIUIe aMIIe for fiIrtIler
disclpU..ry proceed... in this matter. The naembcnhipofthecommiaee is JUde up of
both atlomeys aDd TbiI cue is DOW cloteel.
Because 1be s.roaly Ita the autborit)' to IddrcII questions ofeth1ca. tbe con-ittee
could DOt Iddresa Illy leJll __..widell you may feel c:oncemed. Ifyou have
further coocems about what 10ur Iepl remedies IUY be, Jou must CODaI1t with Iepl
counsel ofyour cboa. The Florida 8. iI unable to provide IepI advice in tblllI8pegt.
,.-3 The Florida Bit, compl_.instRobett w. Bauer, October 31. 2012
Mr. WatlOft'. Letter lleporI tiDed to eOJq)ly with Rule 3.7>because it did DOt expJaID wh)'
the complaint did not warrant t\artber proceedinP- Also. tho LeattJr Report failed to include Illy
documentation expJainiIla why tile complaint did not W8I1Ut flfther pIOCIed.Jnp. Mr. WItson
forwIrdocI the malter for to CIlI SChwaJ(, .DesipUod Rcvicwett wbo defcmcl to the
rmdins oftile lfievlnce coltUlliboe by letter June 27. 2011. (Exhibit 2). Mr. Scbw8il replied:
"After comprebeDlively readina all docUlDCllll ill my poIIeIIioa Ja refereGce to cbe above styled
complaint. J have determined that I wish 10 defer to the findinl oCtile Jricvlltce committee.."
Mr. Schwait did not rapoad to my letter dated Jply 31, 2011 (ExhIbIt 3) mquesdna he comply
witb RIlle 3-7.4(k) InCl oxplain why die compJaillt did DOt ....... t\ather )nCIId1up. Mr.
Schwait did not Nspond to my llI8IItioa that I JnIde meritorious complaints to tho Florida &.
.inst lawyers pilt)' ofmultiple tnacbe8 offlle Bat. RuIOl, which QOIDpllintl d1e Bar It..
failed to honestly adjudicate. Mr. Bauer, referral from the Florida BIt LRS. dctcnniJlecl that my
lonner lawyer Mr. CookofBarter, Rodems a Cook, PA. was "allimy attorne)'". Mr. Bauer
said july would love to punish Illimy attorncy". (Truacript. Mar-29-2007. p.29,_ 17).
I
Mr.. Schwait did not rapomJ to my ICcllSllion that Mr. ItocIems impoperIy submittod thirteen
paJC di.tribe to tho Bar in Mr. Bauen dcfeuse that \WI a false and mi.lNdiD" mel palpable
conOiet ofinterest, since he is a plltncr wicb Mr. Cook at BRer. Rodems & Cook. P.. A. Tbe
information provided by Mr. Rodema, thea incorponllCd by iJlto Mr. Bauef. NlponICt
rcsulled I1CW brachcl oftile eI1Iicl rules. includin&:
Rule 4-8.4{c), conduct involvtns dlshonesty. hid. deceit, ad misleprelllltldion.
:Rule 4-1.4(d). conduct Jftjlldicial to the administration orjUltlcc.
I
The Florida Supreme Court bas delopted to tho Florida SIr the function ofcUscipliniaS its
members. The Supnme Court and the Bar blve a f1dIIciary 10 ptVtect memberl of1l10 pubUc
harmed by the uaetbicll practice oflaw lad Iawycn. The Florida Bar unCortuRaIdy is beioa
operated, and demonllnlbly 50, in I fIsbion _ to protDQ _If IIId bed lawy.. rather than the
public. Por example, the Florida Bar'1 claim tl18t tile PIIICO commiuoc it ita MpmcI is
profoundly mislaKtinS as set forth ita my April lIt 2011 email 10 Mr. W..... (Exblbit 4).
DNa S. IIIipod. November IS, 201081 the InveIItipIiaa;Maabar in
(::\\ apiast Mr. Bauer. In Marob 20111 provided Mr. Kamer mare al1eptionl of.ilCODdact .iast
Mr. Bauei. Mr. Kramer rapor.dcd by email March 14.2011.8:12 a.m.: (BIhibit S).
I have roccived a lett from you essenrially -ina to Idd additional around! 10 your
complaint .pinat Mr. Baler. Pl_ be adviled that tIIis is not proper proecdure to
alleac additional complaiDtB ap_Mr. Bauer. To clo 10, you must direct,our
coiDplain1s to the Florida Bart not to tho Grievance Committee. or 10 the investialdaa
member. is weD defined procell or nwiew that every complaint soea tbrouah
prior to beiDa -peeS to committee. Itl is not unuual that multiple will be
mado by one individual qainst p81ticullr lawyer. Howeya-. C8Ch compWnt must be
leViewed ad the notice nquiremcMI ofduo procell (olio_in order to tho ()OIIJplaint
10 be properly p**' apiaBt a lawyer. 'loMe direct 1III1dditionIl4:OlllPiaiats about Mr.
2 Carl SdaWfltlla....oftile Blr'sBolrd otOCwnoll, ..............of..DeJJ Or.- Jaw Ina.
The Florida Barf ccnnplaint aSliDlt Robert w. B8uer, October 31, 2012 p... 4
B....s eonduet to the Bu. Dircctina thaD to me or to the Committee will not IeIUIt in
discipline apinst Mr. Bauer. PIeIIC let me bow if you have au, questions. Thank you.
In vieworb forel0ins, aDd the failure ofMr. Watson'. Lder Repod to explain iD complt.ee
with Rule 3-7.4(k) why the eompl8inl did notwllllllt tbrtherproceedi.J it appall that my
complaint wu dlflCicm. 1be Lecter Repod .bowI no _ of, or -Uudiclltion any
violation ofthe Kulu ofProfeaional Conduct. Therefore 1110 proaeecUnp In file DO. 2011
OO.013(IB) did not make res jucliclta CODIickqdon ofa breIcb 011110 Rules by Mr. BlUer.
New Alleptio ApiDlt Robert W. a.
Limited by the Bar'1 pohibition onlUbmitdnamore thin 2S paps.
.d lawyer lhould1101 accept repruenlatio" unit L'DPI be compelatly andproWlptlyco.,ted.
.IlL Mr. IlgIE IIl1.Belg"dJ2.Betlr, MI c.lUt -l'Iwt " ofJIIe _e
b!c 4-1.16(cI) ProtectionofOieat. JatereIt
AItIW)W m'" kiD ai, ruollllble .'pllOMid"'" "" _ o!wltlltlnMfIlltJ tJ. cit...
Justice Tbamaa pnted my Rule 13.5 to extend time to file until December 10, 2012
petition for writ ofcertiorari to the U.S. Cowl; ill CA.11 cuea 12-11028 _ 12
11213, (Exhibit 6). Mr. Bauer and his rUID lie in each QIC. I need the file to prepue
my petiticm. Mr. B.....refused to Ntum my file for lM'etal yOlll 011 the bail ofaft improper
chqinslien of$12.650. By leuer September Ii, 201210 Mr. B... eoII11IeI, I demIncIed
reIUm ofqt file &om B. Cbapnllll. (EOibit 7). MI. Cbapman did !lOt respond.
In my letter dated September 19, 2012 to ML Chapnum. I raponded to Mr. BaJen letttI dItecl
Aul'* 2", 2012 that stated, "Ifyou wish to oon1lct me at tbe number listed above I would be
@
hippy to dilcuu nsolvina the lien iIlllWlllCl. iI ecceptabIe to all ptUtiea.". That offer is
l Rjccted.IfMs. ChIpMn or Mr. Bauer w.t to 6cua pIOpORCI raolutioa. I RlqUll8Ced they
respond witb. wriUeD pmposal. I 1110 reject Bauer's o.1DIdo by email AupI& 27, 2012,
that stllal "Mr. OilJespio is free to contad me 011 III UlnGOrded line and I wUl be hippy to
speak with him." Aaaiat ifMr. Bauer has something substadive to say,. I a:quest he submit bis
otfer or1houabts in letter. I bellevethil ia. *puadcr Rule 4-1.16(b).
All calls oil my home office bulinea telephone cxtelllion Ire rocordcd for quality IIIQrIDCC
o purposes to tho bus.ineIa use cxempticn:ofFlorida Swuces cbaJ*r 934. specificaJly
W aeodon IIKI the holdina orRQy.J,HeaItb Carp Seryb Ipc;. y .Jeffeggg:PUot LIfe
924 F.2d 215 (11th eir. 1991). n.e no exeeptionl to this policy for Mr. Bauer.
l!a..Mlll&dust" RIco AcdYib IladtrpliMBlrCowRie". clDWtilatigp
Rifle COIIduct iavo1vinl &ud
t
cIeccit, IUd "-pIMDIltadon.
Rule 4-lA(d). conduct prejudicial to tbo ofjusticc.
R1lIe +U(a), JePOdiaa misconduct of Jawyca.
I
Crimelad miscODduct by the lawyers It Ilodeml a Cook, P.A. fOllll the buil ofall my
B.. complaba.lJId involve 20 Jelllt&ld dvillawiuita md lepI pmceediap. A lilt is found at
2Ibibit I. Bauer ancl Mr. RocIeDII enppd petIem orracbteerin. activity to subvert or
uadernline my iIIitial complaint apin8t Bauer, 81, 2011-00
t
013 (88).
I
I
The Florida Bar, complaint apinstRoberl W. Qaober 31,2012 r.-5
While Ibc: Florida BIr does not have jllrildietion 10 consider eivil or crimhW violatiou ofRICO,
the hcketeerlDa.lD8ueDCed IIIld Corrupt Orpnlzattonl Act. II U.s.C. Sec. 1961-68. It does
1[1 have juridcdon and duty to Invadpte Rlated breIcbeI oflbo R" ofProfellioall CoDduct.
U RD_ ......c(c), 4-8A(dh end 48.3(a), ...,hes oCclaty r:hat fIclJitate the RICO acdvity.
I
Mr.1lodem1 and Mr. Bauer enNed in. pattern of IUCO lCtivity inviolatioa ofllul. 4.I...t(c),
4-8.4(<1), and Rule 4.8.3(a}. 10 improperly fOtCe asettlaDeM in my federal Civil RiJbta IIld ADA
disability lawsuit, _ in U.S. Dillrict Com, M.D.FIL, eMf: no. S:IO-CV-OOS03, 10
which Mr. Bauer and hls rumare Defendants. 1be cue wlJlIOOD to be suIImiUecl peddOll
for writ ofcertiorari to the U.S. Supremo Court in C.A.ll OllIS 12-II0211Dd
On June 21
t
2011 Mr.1lodems improperly obtaiJDJ for Mr. Blucr'a beneftt .letdement front me
durina. coercive _tIt tM Edgecomb Courthoule in T8ftlP8t lleld cUaabUlty
IICCO_. This iI &om '5. FIorid8 Supremo Court petition SCI I-1m Jm1lll'Y 9. 2012:
5. At tho dlIection of Judae Amold I ,olUIItIriJy appcuecI June 21, 2011 lor I dcpoIitIon
It the Edpcomb CourthoUII in TIIIIpI to purp tho CODtempt IIICI racind the anal
but that tamed out to be a trap to fareD walk..-ay BettJement apeement ill the
lawsuits. Upon my arrival at the courtbo'*t I WIS 1Ikea imo CUIIOdy and invol..-wily
codned by two HDlsborouP Couaty Sberitrl Deputy Randy OkUDa _d
Deputy L.., BerB- I WII denied under dID AmcricIna with Disabilitiea
Act (ADA). 42 U.S.C. )2101 ct 1Cq.,1IId Ibe Federal Prc*c:tioD aDd Adv00llJ1 for
Mentally 111 Individuals AQI. 42 U.S.C. 10801 et .... After beinl beJel ill custad)' durinI
thO deposltioD Ixover four (4) hours without. lunch break, or dao usual mid-day meal
provided to a priloner, I became confusecI and dilOrien1mcL The record (A.4.1.12S) sbows
that I \VII so impairccl that I could ROt .... I decision to iiI" tho qcocmeot. My COUDIel
Eu_CulaaUuolo (A.7), whomI hired from CraipHII a couple weeks earlier, mIde
the dceision to Idtle bCCIUII "judges IIevc mlld OD their shoes". Illiped the apaneat
wtJe contbsed IDd in .. dlminishod stIte. ClallalluolodiIobeyed my prior written IIId
vabal inItIuctiona riot to ICCept a walk4way sou1cmcat Once I W8I relased
ftum cua10cly _ had a meal. I realized the IICttIemcIII WIS. mistake and promptly
disaff'umed diD agreement by written notice to Mr. RocIau, Mr. CatllliuoIo Ind Major
JlI1Ies Livinpton ofthe Hillsbcxuuah County Sblrifrs 0ft1ce. (A.2.1.2-3).
It appeINd tJwt the lCUlcmeDt resolved the $12.6S0 chlrJinl Uc:a uaed by Mr. Bauer to bold my
/00 cae file. Mr. 8a.... said DO. 8auctr..me. letter dBd A..-24, 2012 DtIna1b8t RodemJ'
(/ "Seltlement Atpeement IDd General Mutual Releue
lt
ofJune 21
t
2011 docs not biDd hiIn. it
e
binds me. Mr. Bauer'sletta"appcIrB at Bxhibh 17, This i. die operative quote:
Mr. Rodom's (sic) relcasedlted June 21,2011 does notblvc 111)' lepl effect OIl the
amount o(JIloney that ia owed to ahi. finD. Further, it does not biDet thl. 11l1li ill .yway.
I (sic) does bind you but not us.
O
I was shocked by Mr. Bauer's.e.." u Mr. Clltaltiuolo m8de tho decilion to ICCept this
d- lIOldement. ] do DOC undentand how aJCIt1cmoat,"only bind me. Cutaafiuolo novel' expJaincd
this to me. I believe this is Azrther evidmce _ CastIIUuoIo worbd apinIt III)' iDtaeIt.
and mlJIIod in a patteftl ofRICO activity with Mr. o.ucr and Mr. Rodcms to undermine my Sir
6 The Florida Bar. complaim aaainat Robert W. Bauer, October 31. 2012 p.
complaiAts.1Dd civillidptioa. throulban oaaoiaa pa1temofndIcoDduot in vIolMioD oflluIeI
4-1.4(c), 4-8.4(d)t ancI4-I.3(a). breaches orduly 1bat fictltIate 1be RICO acdvily.
Mr. Bauer and Mr. Rodems also ..ppclln an eirlfer pttem ofmisooacluct ill violadOlt ofRuJp
4-1.4(0), 4-8.4(cl). 8DCI44.3(8). brcIcbea ofduty that flcilitlte RICO 1CtMty. II follows:
1ft a leu to Florida GoY. Charlie Crist ct.tcd J...-y 4
t
2010 (Exhibit 9) Mr. Bauer eodoncd
Mr. Rodems for jql' mel praised him u 41ononIblo IIIdpofellional
lf
11ds Is Impeached by
Bauer. statement to me that Rodems milleid Judp BII10D durinB heeriDa Ootobar 30t 2007.

TlIIIICript. my Ielephone call with Mr. B.. Feblulry '. 200!J,]'aIe 11
11 MR. ImUBR= . [I] thiWt it clearly put.
12 before the Court the mistake or perjuryI whichever
13 the Court d.etennin.. that they wi.h to interpret
1.. Mr. Rot3ems mi81e.diDg the Court "hen he .aid that
15 oertain tbiag. were present that weren It. If you
16 r d tho motions I clearly i4 Chac in there.
Mr. Bauer i. refenilll toRod_
t
false It*nKRto the Cowt that Jliped re,.....atiOll
apeoIIIeId; I cBd DOL An auomcy who mis1e&d tbe Court is D01 "hoaonIbI.1Dd profellionlr.
Fint. Mr. Bluer bad a duty UAcler blo 4-&.3(a) to report Mr. ItocIoms' mi8CODduct to1beB..
Second, Mr. Baucr'slettcr is evidence ofa pIItemofRICOactivity In breIdI ofthe Rules of
ProfessioJlll Conduct, Rules 4-894(Clt 4-8.4(d). and 4-8.3(a), DeDded to uadenniDe Bar
complain1l. In quid proquo, Mr. Bauer pIOviclecl a leu. to (Joy. Crist IVppOItiDaMr. Rodems
for judp, llOIIJinltioD to whieh I objected to bYleUcr 10 GoY. CriIt. In reIIIrD, Mr. Rodems
provided 1he Bar. letter In IUppOlt ofMr. Bluer in my complalm apiDIt Bauer. Mr. Roderu'
letter was e.entially. 13 pap diatribe offal8e IIId mlsJeadinl1bltements to obItnJct justb.
On July 1 2007. Mr. Bauer tlled OD my bebllr&i,tIfJ'" Motjon Por BcIIwinI ofID Older
arantina Mr. Rodcm.s judgment on the 1ft it Mr. Baueraleaed Mr. Rodem8 miIIead
the court described bI yp-t. (Exhibit 20).
2. PlaintiffmovCl for ....m, on the arOw* thIa the Court'ajudpent wu bMecl OR
the DefendaDtl' npN8IIdatioDs1bIt tbem WIIIIiped a1tome)' foe ........
BIzter, Rodcas Cook aDd the Plaintlft
3. Defendants have not produced asllJIlOd eGJI)' ortbe attIJmey lee between
Barbr, Rodema &Coot aDd the Plaintift
4. DefeDdants have only prockad.....copy oftile attome)' fee apement between
Alpert. R.odoms, Ferrentino a. COok IIMI die PIIIintift:&.
I
P1IjntjtrsMotion For Bthearjg wasliped by IitOmey TillY' M. Bell (nee UId) ID No. '%924.
for the Law Ot1iee ofRobort W. Bau., PA. Mr. Baler diuvowed this IIIOdon,
accotdiag to his response to TFB dated Aupst 11.2010. BuI Ms. Bell conf1mIed to me in.
letter dated August " 20I0 (Exhibit 21) that Bauer made acliJect request that I.the
pl_al. Ma. Boll left die Bauer law finn shortly after this motiou wu .bmittccL
The Florida Bar. complaint .1IItRobert W. B_
1
OCtober 31, 2012 Page 7
Durioa' beKiIli ADJUSt 14, 2008 beforo JudI' Marva Crea*wt Mr. Bauer accuNd RocIcms of
not wortiD8 in a profesafonal manner. An auom.y who does DOt work in a profu8ional mmner
is. by daflnition. not IDd profe&sioDII-.
Tnnscript. PlIO 16. bcaianiDa at line 24
24 [MR.. BAUBR.] Mr. Rod bas, you knoW, deoided to take II full
25 nuclear blt approacb in8tead of U8 trying to work
1 'tbi. out in a profes8ional "DDer. It 18 my
2 mistake for sitting back and giving him the
3 opportWlity to eake thill full blast attack.
Mr. Bauer refiJled to permit me to attend or testify at heariDp in my caebecIuso Mr.1lodema
would knowinSIy make C"AMIlmeots to prod me IIfor no better purpose dim to.... Bauer
wmte me this email July 8, 2008 8t 6.0S p.m. -ina in pert:
: I
"No -I do DOt wish for you to attelld beIriap. lam coaamed that )'011 will not be
able to properi)' deal with 10)' ofMr.1lodema comnaadI- you wiD edalbC the
situation. laman that he maba them far no better purpoee tbaa to anger you. I
believe it Is belt to keep you away ftom him and not allow him to procl7OU.II
Aa attomey wIlo knowinllY prods me with commentl to...ad Int1Ime me. adcIeay me
access to court in my CIIe, is D01 an 1Ioaorab1o pmfelliODl1" IUama)' IUitabIo forJudie-
FiMlIy, Mr.. Bauer determined1UtMr. Cook WII "I slimy attorney" for dehudinlmc ill tt.
ofthe Amscot cue. IfMr. Cook was :a slimy a1tol'DBy", tbal Mr. Rodems WIS 8
slimy Mtomey too. Partners oRPlcd in the pnctice oflaw IN 0I0h reapoastie for the had or
mesUlenoc ofanother pII1Iler wilen the later actS widUR the ICOpC ofthe ard1DIry busiDe. ofIn
IUcmcy. Saa.Yma Qev*"", lng, vc Bcn*jn. )77 So.2d 16 1965). Mr. Rode.l
t
aailleadift& IeplllJUlDllltl in defeD80 ofbis pIdIIet aad ftrm CRIItod new ethics broIcbel, leO
at)' COIIlplaint apinstMr. Rodcma. File No. 201]-10.271 (138).
Mr. Cutqliuolo ldInitted AU8U1t 30, 2012 in a \vriaen teIpOIlIe 10 'Ibeockn P. Lialewood Jr.,
Bar Counsel in TFB File No. 2013-10
t
162 (6D), dial Mr. Rodems DIldo III UDIOIci1ed offer to
CUlqliuolo to usill him in MY tbtIn Bar grievance fmJD me. FIOm PIP 3. 1I:
"My opposiq cxnlDlclat Gillespio'. depoIidoa wu RyIa CbrJJIopbrr RodemL
ChriI once renwked to IDe, llftIOlieitod. that he would be hippy 10 ....10 The Florida
_ OD my behalfIfOillolplo Jriaved JIIQme way he did Bob a.uor.
W
I
This evidence shows how the lawyer diseJpUne pIOCeII 1ft FJaridlIl subvcrned..1IIldcnnincd,
bcrc by Mr. Rodems. milooaduet is a1 the' __oltbilllllUer. duvlJlblll 0JllOinI breada
ofb_ 4-1.4(cI), and 4-8.3(a), wbere Iaw)'crldvcrJma conapiro to, lad...iD,
oonduct involvina diIhooosty. fraud,. deceit, or to obstnJctjllldco ad mIIIead
tho BIr or: itslribu.uJ. to avoid discipline well 10IdvIDOO of., SIr compIaiDI. 1biI activity
raIIea. immedia1e conflict betw... the die lawyer repesentiDa the
client. Iflhe misconduct il not reported u NqUhecl under llule 4-8.3(&), the ctielal. DOt beIDa
aqnscatcd ia zca1ouI, competent or diUpat JDaIIDCr becauIe the lawyer has cont1Ict with bis
client created b die offer of..isIIace from in In futuIe Bar at
De Florida BaT, complaint apiDIt Robert W. Bauer, October 31, 2012 Pap-I
I
V, SM' 9
r
*"AMSCQI cw
ClosJns Statem.t PIIUd - B.....ch ofBar Rule 4-1.5(1J(5)
My former a1tomcy Will_ J. Cook pnpted mid siped. huduloat BaItet while
~ me In the aettlcmaa BuRP L Q'i'P""a Qt.! App Bke"'eld. tpd Nep
Gil"!. AMSCOT Corporatkm. CueNo. Ol.-14761-.u. U.S. 11th CircuIt Court ofAppeals,
in violation ofFIa. B. Rule 4-1.5(1)(5). Mr. 0J0k IDd Barka'. Rodema &; Cook, P.A. ("SRC')
repreeeDtcd me mdtho 2 c6erplaintifti in Ildption IpiDst AMSCOT CorponIdDD. rArI.rtIxJt'"
or AMSCOr). a failed clullCJtion lawd0". Joens. BRC wu llUCOlllOl firm
and IUbstibIte COUI*1 to Mr. Cook'. prevloul firm, ~ F.".tifto at Cook.
P.A.
3
r Alpllt ftrm
lf
) which commenced md litipted tho AmICOt IaWlUit for one year.
I
The GOntinpnt fee -sr-nent between 1De and Mr. Cook IIld BRC In the AmIcot lawsuit WII
not sipecl by Ill)' ofthe partiea. in violation ofPIL BIr Ibde 4-1.5(t)(2). The om, ~
contiDpm f. ap"GOIIKd is with me, Mr_ Coott ad 1bo Alpert finn, whkl fInD Gloset.
This ease boila down to the vemcity ofa sinal, ..teoee OIl the CIoIina .......(Exhibit to)
)npued and aipod by Mr:Cook for BRC ofOc1obar 31.2001. The iQItmic)C ItateI:
"ID sipiaa dais c101iDa statemeDt.1 Kknowlodp that AMSCOT Corporatba leparately
pald my _rnoy. $50,000.00 10 com,.... my aam.ys for their claim apiDst
AMSCOT for court-4wardec1 feelancl 001II.It
~
1blI sentence was later delenninecl faIIc. The clO.ina StlfemIJd: is ftaud. weN DO court
aWMted fees 0($50,000 to Mr. Cook or BRC. TIle CloIinI Stltement _IfiI oriclonce offraud
by Mr. CO\Ok and SRC Ipiaat me.dthe other two dients in the AMSCOT ClIO.
As a1UUtTr of law it \VIS impouiblc to have the aomt-aWllded C..c..... by Mr. Cook mel
BRC 011 the Closiq StatDmeat. bccIu. the IedenI trial court QIdrI: (Doc. 116) e1I1IIId Aupst
It 2001 by U.s. District Juclp RichIftI A. LIrDra dllmillled thole clalma with prejudico in
Clrmept.BIomefte14 agd QjUggjo It AMSCOT&8IJAmIion, cue DO. 99-2795-CIV-T-26C,
U.s. District Court, MD.Fla.. TIRlp8 Division. 1111 Court fouud dial all o f 1 b e ~ . ill
this action occwred before the effecdvo _ ofttle appliclblo law, 65 Foci. ReI- 17129.
RepI8tJOD Zt pIOIDulpted pursuanllo tho TILAo, the Trudl-t.LcncUns Act. JudIe Lazzara held:
Afmr considering the arpmeats JIlIde and all die auIloritics DOW before it. the Court
finds 1hat count I failllO allcWm for reUcfUDder 1111 11LA$. Moreover, .yI'tt*Dpt
at ltatinl claim UDder 'the 11LA would be ide. HaviDa reacbecI tbil coneluslad, the
motion for 01_ certification is now (Duo. 116, pp. 3-4)
PACER. C_8:9kv-02795-RALI>cxDnent 116 FJIed 0&'01101 ,.1 of 11 PlleID 1340.
The Florida k, complaint asainst Robert W. Beucr, October 31,2012 pago. 9
The CtOlJng S1atcmcRt prepIred ad liped by Mr. Cook for BRC otOctobcr 31, ZOOI fBlIed
to disclose or itemize 53.580.67 in COltS and eXJ'!'lllll, and failed reflect $2.544.79 paid to
attomey Joaa1baD L. Alpert. Mr. Coc*ts failure &0 dilClo8e or bemize a total of'"125.45 in
expenses under Rule 4-1.5(f)(5) was done in ftxtbamce ofhi. fraud aplnst his clielltl.
Pia, Bar Rule 4-J,SeN5). 1ft the CVCDt *"II .recovery. upon tJ. GOIIOIusiOll orthe
RplClCDtation, the lawyer shall prcprc .,clolinBItIteineDt NfJectinlan itemization of
aU eosta IIDd expelllCs, together with the IIDOUDt orfee mcoived by 0IGh pIdJclpatiDa
lawyer or lawtbm. A copy oftha cIOlin,_.hall be executed by all participatinS
lawya-s. .. well u the client. and eICb shill a copy. EKh paticipatins JaW)'
shAll retain cop)' ofme written flO contPct and cIosina sIIItemeDt for 6 years Ifter
execution oftile closing ltatemeot. Any coatlnpnt fee COIdraGt IIICI clolinl stItamCDI
shall be IVail.WO tor inIpecdoa at taIOnabJc times by die eJieat. by lOy other perIOD
uponj\Mlicfal order, or by 1be appropriate.dilcipliDuy 1pDC)'.
Mr. Cook Jn8intains he wanot requimd to __or itemize UDder Rule 4-1.5(t)(5) com of
53.580.67, or show $2,544.79 paid to Mr. becaUIO tlAMSCOT CorporadoD 1CJ'III8lI'1y
paid my auomey. $50.000.00 to compeuate m.y atIOrDl)'I fot their claim apIaIt AMSCOT for
court-awarded fees mel COlts.' But the "claim" to 150.000.00 far _and coati
WIS Iatar dctmmined false. 'I'IHR wu no "claim" 10 $50.000 for "COIIIt-llwmled fees. costI.'
.
Mr. Bauer outlillcd this frIud to JucIpBadon 30, 2007 durinS heariDs for judpleld
0Il1be (Tranecripc. October 30
t
2007. ".39-40)
22 (MR. BAUZR] Another i8Bwl to poiDt aut the fact thi. 1. for
23' their claim of attorD8Y'1 fee., there
24 w no claim.. The claim bad alr:cly been detenained.
25. by the court, denied. It didn't exist any lROre.
1 [MR. BAtJBR] Yes, there wu an appeal out.tanding, but that
2 doean I t re8urrec:t any claim, The only thing that'.
3 going to resurrect a clailit is an overruling by the
.. appellate court. A claim DO longer exist once it I
5 been denied, even if it'. 'on appeal. So in
6 rt1ng th.re existed 'claim for fe
7 is talae. It - it. not there.
Mr. Cook'. CID8bI. StatDleIll FrtIIId was trick"to eYIde the ..... ofID <_peel) coatiD..
fee and payment to me ofS9.143, mylawfbllhaR oflbe S56,OOOtolaJ RCOveay.
Imteld. Mr. Coot IDd BIlC paid me $2.000. LfbwiIe Y1idl the oMtwo plahdifti. Mr. C....
and MI. Blomefield. Mr. Cook's had NIUIIed 1,121.431.03 uajUltenrichmeat for __
Bile. Mr. Coot IIDd BIlC toot oyer 9(M oldie AIIIICOt bDI recovery for themlelvea dIrouaII
fraud api. their cliemca. Mr. B...Dotod it WII apinat tbe R.u1. to enfOlOe III oral..-t
Tr8ucript, telepbooe call, Mareh 29. 2001. pase 16:
2 MR. BAUBa: The way that I. looking at this
3 1. thae they either are entitled to nothing becaU8e
4 they a.ce attempting to enforce an oral ccmtingeocy
5 tee agreement, which i. agaiDst the Profe88ional
6 Code of Bthic.
f
or they ahould be entitled to
7 45 percent of
The Florida Bu, compliint apinst Robert W" Bauer. October 31, 2012 PIle - 10
Mr. 8aueI: WIS rcfarinl to the 45,. coodnpncy
fee provided. by Rule 4-1.S(fJ(4XBXi). Mr.

Bluer allO knew Plaigjfr. Motion for Sununaa '._was filed but DOt yet beaJd.
TrllllCript. tDlepboac call, March 29, 2007, piles 16-17:
23 MR. GILLaSPIB: Yes, that'. what I argued in
24 my SUlllllary judgment. And that might be a good
2S place if you want to review 80:t of the chain of
1 documauts and everything.
2 MR. Your .uaaary judgment: has Dot been
3 beard, correct? .
4 MR. OILLBSPllz That's correct.
5 MR. BAUER Okay.
VI. Statemeat olth. Qp. 'gQlt 115...... , E! 2.
Gillespie v. Barker, Rodems &: Cook (BRC). 05-CA7205
Relladici. IltabJIIW Pro s.-ant........,....1113. 2_
On II, 2005 I aQOd Mr. Cook and BRC tiy filina a pro II CompJUd to NCOV.
$6.224.7r stolen by them tiom my IIIttlement hi the Am8cot cue. Ojn_y. 1mB.pcIems
& Cqok. PA. ItII., call no. R)'ID CJJris&opller Rodems npacIIIIKi his p8rtDCr aDd
law firm apinIt me, and .... _IDefor libel
Mt. RodeJU aquod that Ibe "claim" for in-_fees IDd costs- actually
_lied to fee-shiftin, provision oftile TILA. In ..... the ",,000"elalm....AMSCOT
for feci_ eos1I" is I fnud, amisludina1cpI-a-b)' Mr. Rodoma to die
Cowl Thete were no 8Uorney& fees awarded under tile 11LA ia thll cue. NoDe. There w. DO
possibility of aD awardod ofattomey& fees under the l1LA in this cue because the trial court
QrIIa: entered AUJUlt 1, 2001 by ludge L8rzara tho TILA claim. with prejuclice.
PLEADINGS AND LEGAL ARG1JMENTI CONSIDERED BY JUDGE NIELSEN
Order On Det'endu1tt' Motion To DismfM Agd Strik&.lanuary 13. 2006
..Judlea. a.11II R.odems CIaipnJ and CcmtenIiOdl Not Mdorious
AppeIriD, pro Ie, I pevaJ]cd on Mr. Rodcms' JI)tion to dilllli.. 1Dd wbeD J.RicbarcI
Nielsen anteNd Order On DeCenclmts' Mqtjog To PI"And Sqjkt, 13. 2006.
(Exhibit II). Juclp Nielson mjocted Rodema misladiDa lepI qumad,. &be "cJaJm" of
S50.GOO in "court--awarded fea and COltS". Under the IIpI doctrine ofleijudica1ll, Mr. Roclems
was precluded from ev. spin...rtin, a 'claim" for S50,000 in "COUIt-awanW fees aDd costa
in this aclaim or contention rojcctcd by the Court u DOt meritorious. (Ilule 4.3.1)
,
Judae NJe'lCD
t
Qrdor On Defcnslealt' Mgd. TpnMd S!dkt (Exhibit I J) refereaccd
1I1e followins which Ire lilted ben sbowiDs the most releYlm JeplIlJUDlelltl:
Defendpt'l Mgtlgo to DJmdp. Ide- 2 pliO pIc--.. Aupat 29.2005 (Edumt 12)
I
PI_If,RebuttIJ 19 Der.dan" Motion 10 ID4 Strike, 16pilei (Bxbibit 13). with
Noticeof Seryice of42 .-aa ofcue law (BDibit 14), submitted October 7, 2005 after
i
'Plarldaateomey ScI... J. 0II1cIen 1I1IrdellnDirIed dw& dIIlDlOUIJIIIDI.a WII 87,143,61. _PlJildfCafjdl
AmtpIptI Cmppw.,IWpro. MayS. 2010 will bow1edp ofJudie BMon.
The Florida Bar, COIIlplaint apMst Robort W. B_. October 31, 2012 Paso - 11
I
receipt ofMr. Rodemll' oaseJaw. Beftlu. R'" faDed to eoonlinlte..time and da1e of
tho hoIrinl with me. Iudp Nielsen allowed l1li to -.s1he baIriIII-lephonlcally, since I
Jakie about 100 mO. from the court. J.lodeIbs URiIaterIIIy set 1ft carl)' 10:30 a.m. time for
the be-S Seprember 26, 2(JOj. Judp Niel..cmcluded the harina uaftnllbcd.lDd
directed Rodems 10 provide me copiel ofhil cae law by D'IIil. siDoe RodemI failed to
provide me the CIIII beforeJJancL Since I IppCINd telephonically, I could DOt lee the CIIOS
Rodeml prclCllteCL Therefore the Court allowed me to rapood In writiaa.
I
My rebuttal stIIed that the Dofendantl owed me and breached ftduoilry duty.1hat thil
action was oriliDally filed in 1m by another finn, Alped, Baabr. R.odemI. Femmtino &
Cook, PAt which abo represented me in otbCrlawsuilB, that durina the Alpert representation
the Defendlnts formed in secret a new firm, Bnr, RodemI " Cook. _ COMpiled 10 tab
clients from the Alpert finn. and enppd in a 10lIl 1.. ofmisconduct to hijack1be cae tor
their own benelllt inoludina. "Defeoclanta also created phony CIosiDa Statom.cat Cal8ely
reflectiDa 550,000 in coult-awllded attorneYs feellDd COllI. (p. 6). YN_nlthat
tile CloIiq StItemeftt is sham. the ......did not n6ct u itemizldoD aU COItS_
expenaes, topther with the amount ofthc fee received by _ putlclpldng lawyer or law
finn.(p.7). The rebuttalallO notes r ~ Rodems' testimoIIy It the ho8rJnI September 26, 2005
admittina 1\0Iii-eontiDgellt fee contr8Ct:
3(a)(i) In his argument, Mr.1lodoma Nfemd to Plaintift's EMIblt 1 ofebe
CompJUnt. abe .Rcplcsencation COD1IICt, ad IWId tIlat 1110 oontr8Ct was not
.{pad, but that he WOtIld ageept the COl1tmCt u ifit were .iped. Mr. RodemI
contJadlcta the very 1\110 he ..this Court to honor. The Repreaentatlon Omtmct
il not lipocl becauac the partie& IlC'VOr exec1ded the coldrKt. Ifthe plaiD IIQpIp
ofthis document control.. thea thO docunteat is not executecl. Mr. Rodems
appcuI to miltad the Court about this fact.
DtfiEept'. Reply to Plaindfr. '*.' tq tW....Mqtiqn 1D DjRpjg awl9qib, aevca
CJ) PlIO pleacling submittccl October lOt 200'. (Exhibit 15). In this plcadiDa Rodems
ldInitted on pip St for the flfSt time, how the &aud ofMr. Q)ok and BRC __Iy workod:
4
SO, when Mr. Gillespie liped the Closina Sbament, Gillespie knew the S50.ooo
paymeat by AmIcot to BIlC WII for dae Jr1IiIIl qaiDlt.Amlcot for C<M1.warded fees,
not for 1ft D'.IBl offoes. t
I
PJaintift's Socogd IJc:bgttaI to DeC"'.', Motu to DiImJp gd StrikC two (2) pap
pleadiaa submitted October 31. 2005 (Exhibit 16), frmIed dlis cue In two pmapapb.I:
1. Defendants' oenbal arpmenllmplodcs on P95 ofits Reply dated October 10,
2005, parapph 3 b. ii. Hete Defendants arpc that the 550.000 is for...for court
awarded fees, amd not ..EYII fee award. This'" the queIIioIl- without an IQIUIl
court-aWlrdod fee, there i. no sIIim for court....wardod fee. 8coauIO DefimclllllS did DOt
prev in court. they cannot rely on I "''''017 cllim for cowt-aWlnled _ IpMIC
tha is gp. 1biI il how Dcfeadantl created tho impteaIion that the Appellate Court
awarded fees, when in f.a the it ruled that the )JIItiea bear their own COllI and 8ttorney'.
fees. lbiI it Defegd.. tjIud 011 It' aMI clispb. Fraud is III exemption to the ,...
evidence mle, h10ckins Def...relience on Frap Trac10r VI CMe. 566 So. 2d 524.
The Plorida k. complalDt apiDst Robert W. Bauer, Octo_ 31, 2012 PIp-12
I
2. Defendaldl breachod their fiducial)' duty to Plaintiff. It II 10nI ellab1ished tbIt the
I'Ilationlhip betweea an attorney &lid his client is one of the most impodalt, IS well .. the
mOlt 18Ond, known to the law. The msponsibility ofan attomoy to pllce hi. diem'.
inIenst Ihead ofhis 0\w in deelinp witb IDIItten upoa which the "'yis employed is
at die foundation ofour lepl .ystem. (Qgl Y MJao*L 122 So. 2d 41'>' It Is t1dacJaay
mlationship involviDl the hipest deane oftru1b IDd CODfidcDcc.1Dd a.aomey iI under
duly. at all times. to represent his clicat IIJd haDcIJe bit cU, aftiJn with 1ho UIIftOIt
depee ofhonelty, (oyall1. aDd ftdeltry. <0wIac;b y. llgswJLy- 98 So. 2cl
4g3). Defendant Cook failed to JeporI Jolm AD1boay'l $5.000 "Dpoper payoffatlenlpt"
to the Florida even thouah Cook beJleved tbIt -chc Florida Bar would likely probJblt
IUCh lDsteId. Defendutl jumpocJ into bed _lth AmIcottllaW)' to
collected $50,000. EftD though Defendants uauc 1hIt tile $SO,OOO Is for aaomeyl. feel,
thO)' Rfulc to accoUDt for the fee, or provide a metbod for dct&rmlniDs the tee.
Mr. Rodent. at this point 8110 hid penoaat .respoit.ibility, ....pIltftel'S enppd in tile
praotice 01law are eacb re8pOJlSible for 1be tiaud or nea1ipaoe ofIIIOtherpatner when the later
IdS within the 800pI oftile ordinary business or.. Iitomcy. Smyma Deyelcpn.Inc, y.
Bomstein, 177 So.2d 16 (2dDCA, 1965). Mr. RoclemI himselfJ1DWhid InaaJ coat1ict.
m..Mr, Bod'.' ".,e\OIdaYit DII",Trlbyll. St01"MD-g.
After ludIC NlelscD rejectccl Mr. Rodoma' misleidiDIlepllqJUllleJlt, his -'cIaiIII" for SSG.OOO in
"court..WKded feel and thilcue WII esientially decided in my favor.1D respoDIC to
cataiD defelt, Mr.. Radem. filed. vexatious libel comtereJaim. Mr. Rodems aIIo diInJptecI the
tribunal for stratesio MVantqe. On MItCh 6, 2006 Mr. RodeJns submitted to the Court 111
affidavit fallCly iavokiDa the name ofJudgo Nioisen ill an a1Jeption that ..1aIet cIiJprOved, a
failed ItUnt that resulted in the Iee_ oftbo lOOp. This WIll tho besbmlns ofRodema
l
"full
nue_ blat" lidptioD later described by Mr. B,Jer. AJ, -It. FebnJaJy 7. 2007 I took
volUldary dillnissal without prejudiQe. I moved to withdrawal my volun1lry diDillaia week
1atIlr in tho hopes offiadiag eounsel. Jodp Bam.in paatad my pro Ie motion to witbdmYallll)'
voluntary diamissal Aupst 15. 2007. which WII UI1rmccl 011 appeal ill 2007-4530.
1
ReI "-die... E1ta11l11bed P... Be - Order........., 13,2OM
The Florida Bar LawyerReferral Service (LRS) referred. and I Mr. Bauer for the
pradice area ofJaw oflibel UKlslander, to defend tho IJbeI cowurolalms ill fills- y. Barter,
Bqdpgp" Cook. P,A, It cue DO. OS-eA72OS. HilJllJorouah Co. Bauer flied IID.mcuded
answer to the libel and nothinl elle; Bauer d1d not conduct tiIcovery in the libel
Bauerjust ipored the count8rclai"" which WII vcxatlous lldptioll. Bauer WIll
DOt compecent (Rule 4-1, I) and not dllIa_t (Rule 4-1.3) iD dofenIe ollbo counterclaim.
Mr. Bauer'sucoeasful1y arlued DIY pro .1DOdoIi to withdrawal my vollllll8r)' diIm-.J, dmfted
and filod I twer knew tar beard ofllobeft Bauer. Otberwise Mr. :s.-\WI mt COIIIpotaJI
(Rule 4-1.1) and not dilipnt ',Rulo 4-1.3) in litiptlna my claims. The tnMcripts Ihow Mt Bauer
A lawyer ,hmlld"", ee.pI reprt""" ._ItCdIJ be 00"""'" CfRIIJJIetetl.
The DIr. COIIlplaint 1...Robert W. Bluer, October 31.2012 Pap -13
ID8""'d JlIdia Barton due 10 his incompetence and delay. s.-even ri*ed my _n
when he failed to for. CODlempt Mr. Bauer was WlVDS to ..... Judge B8rt0n..
Mr.. B..- wu DOt colllpeteDt IDd DOt <filii- in faiUnB to litipte PIejntjft'. Mgliga fIB:
S.PHPYJydam- tiled April26, 2006 wi_ AtDdayjt in Swgzrt. b.IecI 011 the Com'.
OrdprOp PRmdenll' Mgljgp To Disrn. Apd Strjko 0Jdered-...." 13. 2006 that
established. cau. oflCtfon for Fraud and Breach ofContrlct. and I8jected Mr. RadomI'
mialead1na lop( arpmeat that his finn WII emltledto. clalm- of$5O,OOO in "court
awarded fees and ao.".
Mr. Bauer was not tompdCnt and DOt clill'- when be fliled to object to maHtlpdoa of
IDIUerI aIIcIdJ decided rcsjudielta by Jude' OrdorDi Psfpgde.' Motion To
DJRB. AgI kiP entered JIJlU8I)' 13, 2006. speclftcally RodemJ' r.Jsc "claim" to SSO,OOO
in "court-ewerded fees ad costs".
Mr. Bauer was not competent ad Dot dmaedt for DOt -iDa_on S7.IOS 1ttOmrJY'. fees
for Defoadla.. motion for Judgment aD the ploedi. and motioa for
bued on 1lodeJDsf faIIo "olaim- for SSG,GOO in MCC8t..WIIded fees..comtt mlsIeIdiDa
IopIIqUIDOIIt 1bat wu rejected by Judp NWseR'. Order l1DU1r113, 1006. and procJuded
ftom furdw prooeedinp Udder the lepl cIocIriue ofrei judiCIIL
Mr. Bauer was DOt competent and not wIleD be...Judp BartolI by &.tUq to
amend the complaint. A transeripl ofa October 30, 2007 OD De,..... motioA for
Judpw:nt 011 abe pladiDls shows Judge 8Irtbn mcIentood the impomnce ofarneDdina the
complaint. sfIlca this was helrinl for OIl the pIeadiqs_ ne JeconIIhows several
exchanaellike this with t,c Judie: (Transcript, 30, 20f11, I'P. 14 19 respectively).
8 THB COURT: Se are we on the pro version of
9 the complainti'
10 MR. BAUBRt Yes, Your Honor.
11 THE COtJRT: How do you f ..l about that?
12 MR. BAUER: lid like to amend it and make it
.. (MR. u.mm] I don I t 1188 that: - - I have been on thi. cu.
5 for a whole of six month I deD't think my failure
S to have .Mnded t.he ccrnplaint. in aix 1IlODtba i.
1 ov-rly egregiou8 c::em.iCSeriDg we have had 1ftU.ltlple
8 i.sue. to deal with, the hearings that have 1)8eo.
9 required to come down here, the writ of certiorari
10 that has been f 11.4. I don t eMnk thezw'. :b.en any
11 delay on my part or OD the part of my firm.
Durlq hariDa on Mr. Bluer'llDOtioa to witbclmw8l October 1.2009.. Judp s.toa ap:aI
with me that it was "outn.pous.' to be LIIi...pro ., ComplBint after 4 YCIII: (PIp 5).
16 MR. GILLBSPIB: The thing'i. we're into our fourt:h
17 year on thi. ca.
18 THE COURT: I understand. f
19 MR. GILLISfIB: And we still are working on the
20 Plaiutiff'8 pro .e compl,1nt
Tho Florida a r ~ complaint apiast Robert w. Biuer, October 31, 2012 Pap-14
:
21 THB COllR'll Right. ~
22 MR. GILLBSPIBz which i. really Bort of
23 outrageou. fI
24 THB COURT: Right .
Mr. Bluer was not competent _ Dot dUIpat when be 8PPJed Judp BartoD apia M8rcb
20. 2008 wheft he ICpeetedIy moved to eoDtinue hcariaa he wu UIlJftPINd and
failed to hoe an expert witaeM appear. w. S).
5 tTHB COURT: So, I llean., we're way down the
, liDe beE It '8 been ccnt1nued once and if we
'7 continue it again, for what, a couple of year.?
8 Would. that be enough time?
Mr. Bauer wa not competent and am dDiacnt when failed to eall me u witDeu or
otberwile ... Mr. RocIcmI' false teI'tiJnony on behalfofhis firm IIId,....dIaiDs tie
impfopet .litiptioll ofmattca Ibid)' decicIod res judi..by JucIp Mellen
t
Order
entered January 13, 2006. specifically :RocIeIits' pbony "claina
tt
tQ $5(\000 in "ceut......w
feCi and coatl
tt
and the exi8toace ofI sIpcd eontlnpnt fee......betweeD me and Mr. t
Cook adBukwt R.odems I; Cook. PA In the AMSCOT JawlUit. which...'"....ltY
_ PNtt ig yiglatiop orB. Rule +' .'CM).
I
Mr. Bauer w. DOt cornpcteat IIDd ROt dUipdt wboD be IlIo'wIcI R.ocIeaIIIIO eacradIlJ)' -"
durinl beariap on IU1DIDII)' JudptCRt IIIdJudJn-t on tba pleldl..eYen thou8b ludIC
Nie1len nded May ]2, 2006 tbat a 11lOtioo 10 dilqualify Mr. RDdemI WII not deDied with
prejudice on dle bllia that RodemI would be. witness. Mr. Rod_Oj 4f1epaDlel1t8tioD- i1l this
ClIO is esteDtIaJly witness testimony.
.
Mr. Ba1lCf W8I not CDIIlpetlmt and DOt dlUpnt when he failed to seek ADA diubiIitJ
acc_to allow me to attaId beIriDp aM tadfy ill my cue. Mr. Bauer ..tuaod to
permit me to attend court beariDa bee..be IIicl Mr.1todems would. knowlqly IDIb
comm.... to prod me. "for DO better purpose thaD to qeryou Bauer wrote mo this inID
oman July 8. 2008 at 6.0S p.m. statlna in pIit:
"No I do not wiIb for you to attend IIeIIInp. J am cOllCClfted IbIt you will DOt be
abJe to properly deaJ wi02any ofMr. ~ COIIIIDOIdIIDd )'011 will ad1IrrIe tho
situatioD. I 8m IUI'C that he JUkes them for no beUer puIpOIe tbaD 10..,. you. I
believe it is belt to keep you away &om him adnot IlJow him to procl JOU."
Mr. Bauer was informed about my di_lily tom my ADA lQCOIIIIIlodation requeltllUbInitted
rc the Court Petxuaa, 20. 2007 _ MaIdl S.2007. M1 ADA ckKunenta show I ..elfl&bJed.
dIM Mr. Roct.na bew ofmy disability firom hi.
1
8nn
t
prior NJlR'SCfttitiOll olme, .....
Radom. wu eappda coune of""conduct (in vioI6D afSectiOll 784.048(2), Florida
Statutal). the )ntllltioullDfliction ofBnlotioaal DJsVea.. tart by Mr. Rodans to Dillie me by
agraYatlnI my exisdna medical COJJdidoIJI. ~ ADA docuaaaat sbowed tIMI aouabt medical
treatment and was presaibed Eftexor XR to tho maximum .
I believe ifMr. Bauer !lad spent to minutes jUlt 10 _ig,...aplained to Judae Barron the
nature ofMr. Rod&ml' criminal conduct reJatfve, to III)' PTSD and other dJIabiHd-. lind

Tbc Florida Bar, compIafDt qafDIt Robert W. Bauer. October :3 JI 2Ol2 P8ae l'
provided tho Court oopy ofmy ADAmotion, wbktIlboMMr. RocIcms' _1hJscue
would have gone better. But Bauer never infonnecl Judp BartolI. u the CourIIDcII diICUIRd:
Tnnscript, JaDuuy 26. 2010, pile 8.
12 [THB COURT] if you are yiDg your eli.ability, which i8 yet
13 unclear to me, ha8n't been dealt with accordingly
14 -- I believe this is the first ti.e we are hriag
lS about this.
1& MR. GILLBSPIS: Actually it 1. not, your
17 Honor. This inforNltion va8 prentecl to you when
18 you lftIre a Judge way hack CD March 5th, 2007,
19 Plaintiff'. Am8nded Accommodation Reque_t UDder the
20 ADA. Ifhat had happened is shortly after that: date,
21
1
Mr. Bauer took the c.se over and this motion wasn t
22 beard.
oa Aupst 6, 2012 with leave ofthe UttS. Court ofAppeaII, Jsubmitted Amended Motion for
DiJability Accommodllion. showina dilquaJiticatioR ofRocloms wei Ia)UiIed UDcIcr the ADA.
On JuI)' 1, 2008 Mr. a.. was not competent and not elil". wbeD be riIbcI my
inC*Ceration and failed to sufficiently,..... for a COIIteGPt bcaiDl July I, 2001. Mr.
Rodems souabt to bave me iDcarcemted after Mr. failed to Worm me about aFact
InfOtmltiOil Sheet: T!lDlCript, J1IIy It 2008,"
23 MR. RODBNS: That-. the point tbat I ... going
24 to make ia that that remedy of law may not carry
2S the day depending upon what happens with the
1 relllllinder of thi. IlOzu1ng'. hearing time, 80 ehat.
2 why we .ought incarceration...
Mr.. wrote tis to the Bu In his relpoaae Au8UIt 18, 2010: "Because my staff\\'IS
mDOVed frcnn his CISC, 1bey did DOt follow our aiandInl operatins poeodare& In reptdl10 Mr.
Gillespie's documents. As such, he WIll DOt proYidld with the Fa JoformatioD Sbeet requRd to
be filled aut in eonnection with 1bc Fal JlIdImint ordered IJIiDIt him 0-. MaJdl27, 2001. This
wu..O\WIisht for wbiell [ IPOJOIized to Mr. Gillespie. CJPPOIinI colllll8l. ad tho Court i111be
letter daled July 24. 2008." A copy ofMr. Bauer'.lcIcrappears at Exhibit 19.
What was Mr. Bauertbinkinl for tho 2 1/2 hoar drive troJR hil oflb in Gainesville, to the
Tanpa CourdlouIe? What did Mr. Bauer pllD to,lellludp Barton if. __for my aaest was
issued? did Mr. Bauer WI toall _ -.. eel plio ., OD tbe Ioq drift to T..,.,
aDd .k.e.boIIt tile F"IafO....tioII 8...7 It seems Ulce Mr. Bauer W8I1ICd me to fire hi...
I
XL.Mr. Bl,erIMd "Dt DttidI.lK:Jlil.BPpOp. A_1.LH1Il
a... UA(e), aonduct hud.
RaJ. 4-lA(d). conduct 1ftjudicial to the Idmwstratlon 01justice
Mr. Ba... lied. faclJ, or mIde millaBdiD,l .,..aenu to tho Florida Bar in
hlJ reepo8M da1ed Aupst 18. 2010 10 my initial compllint, file 110. 2011-00.073 (88), oomr-y
to Rule .a-.8.4(c) ad Rule 4-8.4(d). Mr. Bauer's respoue couistod of24 peaea;. 10 )JBIO letter.
and ]4 PlICS ofexbibits. A copy ofMr. Bauer'. rapoose is provided at Blbibit lB.
The Florida Bitt complaint apinat Robert w. Bauer. OCtober 31.2012 Pap-16
Due to the Bar'. probIbition on submlttlnl more:thaD 25 p8pI, I cannot in this initial complaint
fully lilt amd respond to eY11ie, fallebood, mi&repNsentalion. or mislaldlns lep1llJUDlCDt
made by Mr. Bluer in his response dated 18, 2010. Therefore I IJavo 6ated boIow fifteen
(15) inataDces ofMr. B.uer's conduct in\lolvins misrepracntation, dilhollelty. hue!, deceit-_
conduct ..judicial to the adminilttltion ofjus1ice. Seven oftM 15 ere Aather diswlleCI below.
J. Mr. BIuIr made false about my \'Olunmry dismiual. SOL. dismissal wlpnjudice.
2. Mr. Bluet mJlIUld the Bar about IlI1IDCliDa my pro 10 Complaint.
3. Mr. Bauer made tal. 8tIteDIentI about the cUquaUtbtion ofMr. Rodems II coUDleI.
4. Mr. Bauer made fat. stltements, and IppeIrI to Plajptltr. Mg1ga for Rcbevlnl.
5. Mr. Bauer lied mhis ltatedle1lt "Mr. Rodeml wa .111 times cordial aad PJOfesliODa1."
6. Mr. Bluer IIIIdc falle s:ucmentlabout Ids appeall court milCODCluct.
7. Mr. Bauer mIdc falle Sfalementllbout a Illy offinal judamcJd.
a. Mr. Ballor macIe &lie statemeRti about his wltbdrawal a COUDIeI. hearIDa w/Judp Barton.
9. Mr. Bauer IDIde misleadm,statanents about viable claims and continpncy fee aareemcDt.
J0.. Bauer JD8de f.ltltements about discdvay and owed by Mr. RodamI.
11. Mr. Baller m.-e misleldina sta1eIneD.ts Ibout his 2007 etroI1I and a "waIk-awaytt settlement.
12. Mr. Bauer made false and mill_ioS statemCrdB about the neu. oftwo judaes.
13. Mr. Baaer fllsely st.aed that Am8cot involYed the "Fait Debt Collections PtKtice Act".
14. Mr. BallOr lied in his statement tbIt I tlu'callmed bII office staft:
15. Mr. Bauer rude misleidinS statemalts abouC my &Ii_bUity __
1. Mi. Bauer IIIiIW the Bar on pap 2 Aupst 18
t
2010 tblt the dfect ofmy
Yolwatary disma.J wu to dlaisa my claims projudicc bccaUie the I1atUII
(SOL) J.. expiled. TbiI is fltl.... My yohmllly dilmi..l W no efJ'eea, daermlfted by 0rcIcr of
Judae BaJ:ton. sUltained 011 appIIll in per curiam. SOL wu not 1Il11lUe.
I
My volunta1y dismissal Fcbrusy 7, 2007 was dCtenniDed to be orno effect. Judp Bmton
panted DI)' pro Ie ..... u set forth in 0nIq9nmiDI Plajntjlf's Motion To wjthdrawal
flaiDtUT,tNotice ofVolypllly Dippj.1 eD1eref Auaust 31. 2007. (Exhlbit 22).
Mr. Bauer luccess1\dly qued .,plV Ie -ado;I. but: Bauer did not draft the 1IIOti0il or file 1be
motion, I did. lu. Barton held IS follOWS in Order p81din, II)' pre.. aIOtio.:
ThiI aadou
t
bavia, come before the Coutt on Plaindffl Pm Se Motion to
WitbdIaw PIalntiIYs Notice ofVolUll1lry :Dismissal, IIJd the Ccut. havina reviewed the
file and having heard 01&1 qUIDCDt from QOUIIICI for bothIi"finds:
i
1. The Pro Sc PlaindftfiJed his Nodco ofVolunt1lY Dismissal on F-.....ry 7,2007
prior to RUinina his current COUIIIOI.
2. Notices of VolWltary Dismissal cal1DOt be tilod purIUIIIC to Rule 1.420 when
counter-elaim is pendina withoPl tilll reeelvlnfJ len. ofcourt. v. PlabUx
s,.MIrketL IDe., S7S So.2d 214 (Fla. 5th DCA, 1990)
3. 11Ierefore. the Notice mVoJun.,. was DO( etfectivo to dUmist the
PIaintitrs cause ofaction.
4. The Pro Se Plaintiff filed 8 Notion fori... Order ofVolUlltlr)' DiImiaeI prior to
_iaing his CUMnt aJun.1 punuant 10 iuIe 1.420 GIl 7.2001_ such
The Florida Bar. complebtt .inltRobert W. B... October 31. 2012 P8p 17
, r
motion requiRxl a court. 0"for it to be effectiYe.
5. Oa Fe".,., 15. 2007 the Pro Sc PlaiDtilffiJed Hodc:e orWithdrawal of
Voluntary Dismi_I.
6. Plllntifti Motion for ID Order ofVoluDtary Dismillll wu iuetrectiv' to dismiss
the Plaintifti cue.
1. It is furtba: detam.incd that a matter of law that Plaintiffis not entitled to tUe a
couot8r counter-eomplaint' in _ponse to DefeDdant. Cowwer-ComplaiDt IbMDt
ore. CUIreIlt JUles ofcivU procecUe.
ORDERED: Plaintiffs Notice otVoluntaty Dilmllaal II hen:by withdraWIL
Mr. RodemI appealed Judge BlItOD
t
Order <lrantjg pJaiptitr. Mqtion To WItbdmwaJ
P1Ijltjtrf Notice ofYolyggry Dym;_'. R.odcmslost. The 2dDCA held in 2007-4530 dIIt my
elliml were not dillDiIIcd. citlDa FIa.R.Civ.P. t.420(aX2lt and Roam Vt PyJIIIx Sagr Mut.)
1nQ., '75 So.2d 214. 21516 (PIa. Sth DCA 1991) dW when is penctins.
plaintiffcannot unllatanally dismi81 complaint without order ofcourt). (Exhibit 23)
Mr. Bluer his repeatedly aDd fallCly represented to the Florida B. tbat Illy cIahu wac
cUsmIased with prejudice, and that the SOL Iud e:xPired, in ftIrthennce ofo1ber cIiIhonosty to the
Bar, his o1hcr responaea IRIdo AUJUIlllt 2010 iDvolviq minpIeBeD..... diIIboneIty. fraud.
dou\it. tad CODduct prejudicial to the adDliaiatration orjudee.1Il the ,..1WIote that Mr. Bauer
n:IUI!eCtId my c1aillll; I WII wrona. My voluntary di_1IIal was dctamined to be ofno cffoct.
I
2. Mr.
I
Bauer mislead tbe Bar on PIP 4otitis reaponse A18, 2010 about ameacl1aa
my ori,mat pro 10 Complaint. 1he record shows repeated atllmpll by ludp 8arIoD briJII dds to
1he atteation ofNe. Bauer, but Bauer refused 10 motion the Court to amend tho Compllint.
Tanacript, Oetober 30. 2007. Pase 33
2 THE COURT I Let me ask this: ADd .. are .till
I 3 on this original complaint?
4 Mit. BAUER: Yes, Your ,Honor.
Mr. Baaor wrote me a MeISe statui" letter Sepaedlber '. 2007J ., belleve it II MOe"'" at 1hi1
time to reevaluate tho initial complan _ draft III amended complaint 10 iacJude a1IeptionI of
malprIcticc aad brncb offiduciary duty." ExIlUIl af. S1iII. Bauer DDor 8II1IDded the complaiDt.
3. Mr. Bluer made a number oftille stltements to the Bar OIl peac Sofhil respoDIe AupIt
18. 2010 about the dIsq..liftcation ofMr. Rodems as COUIIId for his firm and r-m-. Mr.. Bauer
failed to inform tbe Bar that JudlO Nielsen
t
Order eateted May 12. 2006 allowed for reheerinl
aDlOtiOft to disq_lily Mr. Rodcms OR buil that counJCl may be wiIdeu". (Exhibil24)
ladp Baron agreed with fOOae Nililen's Order, and mgated duriDa I baarin& Jaauuy 26.
2010 thIt make "renewed motion to diIquBIity" Mr. Rodems. whole misconduct wu the
centralobltaclo ill reIOlylDa tbi. cae. Transeript, J .my 26. 2010. pap 31:
1 [MR. GILLBSPIBJ .. This i8 .bat the Judg4I wrote: -Thi.
2 to disqualify ie denied with prejUdice
r
The FIori4a DIrt complaintapinstRobcrt w. Bauer, October 31. 2012 Page -18
3 as to ell. c..i. that C0UD8el ...y be a
4 witne8. and on that basis the thOtion i. denied
5 without prejudice. Now, for Mr. Rodell. beiDg
6 vitns, the nature of thia ea 1. e.sentially he
, ia a perpetual vitne. The tran8er1pte .bow that
8 his reprentation t. ea88Dtially on
9 etimony about factual utter8. Mally tiR18. in the
10 tran8cript8 h. is confuaed. He 18 uy1Dg, Judge,
11 we - - Oh, I don't mean we, I mean I aa my att.orney
12 for the firm think this about rr{ client, which is
13 aetually aylf. That cODfuaicn 1. evident in t:he
14 tranllCr1pt. over and over again. I reall! believe
be need. to be disqualified because of h ongoiDg
16 testimony in thi. matter.
11 THB COURT: All right. Well, I uaae there
18 will be a renewed MotioD,to that w111 be
19 filed and then ..gain aet for a hearing once we
20 establish our prooedure, but we eel t do that UDtil
21 we get what I direeted yw to produce within ten
22 days from Ma. Huff.r.
Mr. Bauer alIo misled tho Bar widlthis ltatcment GiIlapie made a modoa for ICbe8rinI in
December of2006 which was arlO deDiecl" 'Ibe pxJtion for mbeIrinI WM flbJed by Judp IIOIIl
with. roferraI ro law eIlbce.....to iovestipte'Mr. Rodema
t
tal. aftidavit to die Caurt. So
Bauer limply lied to tho Bar when be wrote tho !potion rot robcIrina Dec-2006 WM "cIenJecr.
Mr. B8uer fbrther naisled the Bar In hilstatement about aIIeptionI in my Bar complaint sbowIDa
tho dilC)uaUt1cation of Rodems wurequired: "Thae Ke tho SlIDe.....bit WIn JMdo iD
support oftbe Febmtry 2006 matioa. denied." Mr. Bauer knows 1hia is a tal...mem,
..fodh in"60-61, E.vMIcuooY Motion to P*i6' Def.IPW Co".' IlyMam".,.
Radom'" Bark" Rodgns" Coot, PA. July 9,.2010:
60. A harina 011 P1liDtifr. Motion to DiIqua1if1 CoUDle1 wu hold Ap;I2S, 1006. Mr.
ROdcma preaeated the followiaJ cue Jaw in stIppOd ofbil position. Tho caICS larae1y
hrelevant to this matter IJId set ofCIctL taiIod to discJole to the court Icp1
in the controWnljurisdiction known to tile Inycr to be cIirecdy adY..to die
polltion of1be cUont IDd DOt disoJosecl by opposida couatel....
61. Mr. Rodeml violatad FL Bit Rule 4-3.3(c) when he &iIed to dlldole to the
tritJunallcpl authority in tho comrollina juriscUctioD known to Ihe lawyer to be directly
adverse to the positiO!1 oftile client .dnot diJclolcd by OPPOSiaa COUIIIeI, kl tbi,
instance GUleipie pro Ie. Rodems failecl to dilc10le Mc]Jpt1spd y, ISllpy. SsryjgL Igc.,
890 F.SUpp. 1029, or U.S, y, CuJp, 934 FlSupp. 394, Iep1IU1hority direcdy IC1vene to
the position orhit client. MoP..- and Culp INjust two of.1llIDlbcr ofcuea Rodems
failed to dilclOla, ICC th1a motion, 81M Table gCe. that lCCQIIIPIDieI tbiJ motion.
Couusel hal reapoasibili1J to ftdJy IafbnD die ccutoa applicable law wbctber
favorable or Idvcne to position ofclient .to that die court i. IIeUcr .-. to make fair IIld
accurate determiDldon ofdle matter befON it. NcwberMr Y, NcwhgJcr. 31] So.2d 176.
As evidenced by this motion.1epl authority dftctly adverse to thoposidoD of Mr.
Roderns and BRe WIt not (fiscloled to the court by RocIcna.
,
,
The FicriJa Bar, complaint IhiiDIt RDbcIt w. &.., October 31, 2012 Pqe - 19
4.. Mr. Bauer 1IIIdc number offallC IIBte1IieIlta to tbI BarOil pap 3ofbla IapOJIIe Aupst
Jt 2010 about his failure to preeent evidedce that there was DO slped ccnia&ent fee apaneat.
Mr. OIl1e1pie allO&I.that I -f.lled to pre_evidence 1bat1Iwn was no siped
contingeat fee agreement, .ablequent to Mr. Rodems' reptaCIltlllonl dI8t there were.
ThJI aUeptioa UDdencores much ofthe basi. for my motiOll for withdrawal
Mr. Bauer is impeached by his motion filed on my behalfJuly 16, :zoos. P1eigtjQ". Motjon For
RetpripJof1ft Older arantina Mr. R.odeml Judimat on tile pleldilllL In it Mr. Bauer a11epd
Mr. RodeIits mi.lead the court u desc:ribed in ft2-4. (Bxhlbit 20).
2. Plaindtfmoves for -.rinaOft the Ift)Uftda that die Court'sjudp1cDt WII bucd on
the Defendants represem.tionl tbIt there was I siped attome)' fee between
Barbr. RocIem. &; Cook and the plaintift
3. Def_dlnts have not produced I siped cop)' oftbo auorney fee .peenbetween
Bmbr. R.odems &Cook and the Plalndft:
4. Defondanll have orJ1 praduced a.iaMct copy oftbo attorney fee between
Alpert, Barker. RodcmI
t
FemntillO a Cook and the PIaintifL.
PIainRtr. Motion Pot BcIwariDa wu signed by Ittomey TID,. M. BeB (nee Uhl) ID No. 52924,
for tho Law Office ofRabett W. Bauer, PA. Mr. :&au..his Ipparaly dilavowed tbiI motion.
aeconUna to his rapoIlIO to 011 NC 5 made AUSUII 18, 2010. But Ms. Bell coafimaecl to me in a
le1ter cIatccI A.pst St 2010 (Exhibit 21) tltll Me a direct reqlllll daat IIhe sip the
p1ea<Jins. Ms, Bell left the Bluer law firm ahordf after this modon wu submitted.
s. Mr. Bauer made. boldface lie 10 the pip 9 ofbts responIO Aupst II, 2010 1bat
"Mr. Rodems ....all dmcs cordia! and profeMOAII."
"Mr. Gillespie poi,nts to a letter I wrote to Oovemor Crist eadorsIaa Mr. Radems for
consideration II .jUCUcialllomineeWithin me ICCJPO ofhis reprIIentatioa ofBR.e in
this 1A11ter. Mr. Rode. conducted himseltalia hoDOrlbIc IIId ethical otracer ofthe
coUrt. At no time did I find his behavior to be UDelhical. Although we were enpgcd in
litigation. that w. very contaltlous.. 1IlCl ve*d me with clipity IDd respect. 1fOUllG Mr..
RcIemI to be I compeIem IUd skilled IttoIllC)' with all oftbe iJaaaibJe qualities of
cbaracter that we look (or in members ofpw prof_OR IIICl hope to fiDd iIl1hole IOIted
on die bench.. n-e!ore. I WIS pleased to write rhe letter III8Ched to Mr. OiUespietJ
when .ked.It :
Mr. Bauerrs hiah praise ofMr. Rodoms lIIlDpeached iD this compllint, and in tbcIc COIIIPIIia1s:
I
R.yan Cbrlltopher RodsDa, File No. 2013-10,171 (13B)
Eupne P C-1aIfiuok'. File No. (60)
I
I
6. Mi. Bauer made false slatemenls to the a..on JllPI orllls reapcmse Aupit ]8, 2010 in
his cxcu.s fin' not seekm, aUomeys fees 011 failed appeal in 2D07...'30. s...wmte:
Mr. Rodema' IPI*1 \\ U bIsed on. poIition suppotfl:d with Iopl prccocIcnt. WIllie I did
prevlil, Mr. Radans' olalm. were not without merit IDd certbdy did DOt ... to the level
orfrivolity IIIfticient t.) jlll1ify section S1.105. lIICtions ....ldm.. UnfOltUDltely. Mr.
The Florida Bar. complaint spiatt Robert w. Bauer. Octobar 31. 2012 PlF .. 20
Oill.pio 1IIIdo a ver:y'!arp Iepl blunder in voIU1l1IIrily dllmialma his claims apinst
SRC. Due to this error. I had to tab IipH10111t steps to _DIe the l a i m l ~ The IIatUto
oflilnitat1onl hid tolled lad, but for my ICtioas OIl lUI bebIIt Mr. GBlespio would have
~ viable...ofIClion _y.
M)' voau-y dismiaal WII determined. to be orno ctteet JudF8Inoo paled .,pro..
otlola IS set forth in OrdcrJJDaIiW PlajnJitr',IMgJj", To WitlM1raweJ PlaiJIdfr'Notic;e of
vpluptary DLsmI.I entered Au_ 31, 2007. (Bxbibit 12). Mr. Bauer IUCClllfWly uaued.,
,ro.. BIOtIoD. but Bauer did not draft or file tho modon, I did. SOL.aDDt .. ilSUe.
Tho 2dDCA held per curiam in 2007-4530 that nay claimt were JlOt cUlIltilled, cltina
FILR.Cfv.P. 1.420(8)(2), and ROMJ v, pybU, SyperMarbtL loe-. 575 So. 2cI214. 215-16 (F1a.
5th DCA 1991) (holdinl that when counterclaim is pendiDa, plaladffoannot uai1ateraIly d__
compJaiAt without order of COUll).
Mr. Bluer was DOt CXDDJ*ent _ DOt dilipnt for not seekinlitlomey'. feel for RDdeaII' tdlod
eppeat that wa not suppodcd by m-terial filets Or the tppliQdioa ofGiItina law to thole tKtI.
7. Mr. Bauer mIdo false SIatenleJa to the Bar on pep 7ofhls response Aupst 11.2010
about a y ofm.l juclpneat "He tefused, t.owev., to post a baad with the COUIt." ....
Mr. Oillolpie WII unwilliDa to post bond, dwn WI8 HUle I oould do 10 dofenclilaiut In
a;don...:. '8. This __is &110....Bauer know Ibat 1applied for, _ WII denied-not
able to Bet bond. Bauer advIsed apia. a bond
l
in his email 10 me Aupst J9. 20014:24 p..m.
8-1' More iIlfonnadon Is available about Mr" Oilier'S conduct molviq i a ~
dishonesty, fi'IIMl deceit, and conduct prejudicial mthe _ ofjUlliee.
.m..Mr,.p.yer11Ie4II Btport Mieop4,ct o(ldr. RRcItM JK.I1t HdfIl
.11 41-1.3(a) _ofOthLIw)wI. AJ8wyer who bowl_
another Jaw,has c:ommitteda vlolatioDofthe Rules ofProfIItiODll Conduct dill raises
aublratial queltion.. to that lawyer's bollClty. truItwordJiDoA, or t1taoII u lawyer
in other respedI shall inform the appropriate pIOfeDlona1 authority.
Mr.1lodmns conuniued multiple "iolations ofthe JluIes ofProfeaional COIlduct in this matter.
lee my oomJ*int, Rym Christopher Rodoms, File No. 2013-10,271 (138). Below are breIdlos
oriM Rules I believe Mr. Bluer Ibould have reported to the Bar.
Rule 4-3.1 t MeritoriGul Claim, and ee..ationI
ble 4-3.3, Candor Towud tile Tribunal
Rule 4-8.4(e). conduct involvial cIisbonesty, ftaud, deceit. .........tion
Rule 4-I.4(d). conduct IRjudieW to the adminiltratioft ofjUldce
Mr. KodemIIllel1ld number ofmideldJna IepI qumeou 10 the ~ b1c1udinl his tal.
claim' to $50,000 In "court-aWlldod feo8and GOS1I... AppIwiDa pro sc. I pm'IiIodaI RodaDs
motion to elfsmill and strike JIDU8I)' 13. 200'. wbIIl Judp RicbnNIe_ entered Order Og
DefIDdlgll' Mq1lpp To Qiaml., Ap4 strib. Jadle Me_rejeded Rodrms' - lopI
1lJIUIIIeftf, fi1Ie "claim" of$50,OOO In Mcoun-awarded fees and COlIs". Undlrtbe IepJ doctrine
Tho Florida Bar, CXJmpllint apinst Robert W. Bauer, October 31,2012 Pap 21
ofrei judicata, Mr. Rodems wuprecluded &om ev. IPiDIIICltiDa dIiI misleadiq IepI
1IJUIDCIlt, falle "claim" for $50.000 in MCOUIkwwdecl tiel and coati' in this matter.
I
Mr. S..knew Mr. RocIems- 1epl claims and CQlttentions went not meritorioUi (RDIe 4-3.1)..
s.. knew1locIems' &I. "claim" for SSO.OOO ill "courtawuded fees and COllI" ....InIcII
ofRule 4-3.3(a)(l) II\d (4), makinll false statement offact aadIor law to I tribuIIaI. andotrerina
fill., evidoace. Mr. WIS iD &ct hiJ own false teII:iJDoDy. Likewise with
the 'slimy attomey't Wil1i1m Cook, pilty ofelolq stliemeDt Rule 4-1.5(f)(5), IIIcI DO
siped contlnFnt fee IJNCD1ad, Rule 4-1.S(t)(2). Mr. Bluer _ knew dIat die .II foreIoins
clllma aDd contcatioD. were conaidcred, anG rejeeteelM nat JDDritoriouI, by Judp N...
Qrdor OD Defondang' MotIon To _i,l And S1rb. JmuII)' 13. 2006, decided resjudiClta,
precluding furdIer usertIon ofllc*ms' rejected claims IDd COItmtiolll.
Mr.. Rodeml false nidcnce IlKl mislead the COIIIt duriDs haarlnp 011 October 30. 2001
and July 1.2008 for the )JUIpCJIe ofobtainllll_ dIsmista1 ofclUna.-BRe IUd Mr. Cook.
Mr. Rodcms milreJnlCJBd to Judp BatoD 1bII ...was alisnecl COJItIn&ent fee ...,mcmt
between PJaintiffNeil GiDe.pie aDd Defendanu WiDiam J. Cook and BUer. RodemI & Cook,
PA when ill fact theIe wu none. Mr. Bauer filW to preJem evidence tb8t there no lipd
CODtinpat fee aaroement, such 88 my testimony or 111)' affidavit. IIIIte8dMr submitted
Plajotur. Motiop EorB.dKierin1 July 16. 2008..ertinI that there WIt no sIped condqeJIt fee
aareem. which motion Mr. Bauer DOW Ipparl to ecc0rdiD8 to his 2010 NIpOIIse.
For additional of Mr. RodemI that Mr. Bauer WII obJIpted to report under Rule 4
8.3(a). see dai. complaint, bcS:anlq on pile ...IY. Ml.fcondllt:6 4 RICO Activity
Ulltle,.".m. Bill' CDmploillts, Civil Uti,.,...
Diuatilfied CHeats 01Robert W. Bauer
I t
Dr. y. WOOIhJP. rb.D, .. Filed Stgctjqn wgtiop ApjoIt Robert Bur
Improper ChargiD8 LillIS, Using Pro Se IUd UPL PladInp, MiIoIYDY
Dr. Angela v. Ph.D. illIIOtberdislitisfied fomaerclieMofMr. Bauer. Dr. W<Kd1ull
contlcted me November S. 2011 by email. Dr. WDDdhul1 is a deU_land duamlnslady. who
il alllO .. author, a JiClDled private and col.professor. Dr. WoocbIU offcRd
to lCI'Ye procell OR Mr. Bauer and tho other clef..... in my fedenI Dr. Woodhull is
autborized to serve process under Florida law Is.1__P.I. Dr. Woodhull it_the author
ofPolice Communication in Tnftie Stops" available 011 Amuon.com.
, .
Dr. Woodbulllt*s Robert filed a Dtmber of i.aqnpcr "Attorney ChIrIiDI LicnI" in
CISes involvinS Dr. Woodhulr. mother, includlaa the QuIrd"nl&* 01
1
9"" A. falyo. c.e
No. 200B-CP-oG0741. and !be Ftg, orLaN. A. Falvo. c.. No: Ol200s.cP.1083, EiIIdh
Judicial Circuit. Alach.. County; and other CUll, including I. the Flftb District Court of
Appeal. Dr. Woodhull proYidecl me Janway4, 2012 certified copy of Iter pro pleadiq in the
estate cae, the doebt entry ofDecember 18, 2(4)9, a.-.TO And Motjpg To Sgike Or In
The AJt!matiy. Motion To Djamis, Adpmp Beg" Mptlcg fqr ACItJDIY-' QuiaLieU
Asd M9Yon for Sagptign. A_IAttPmIY RQbert Bauer.
ThoPloridaBar, complaint apiDst Roben W. Bauer, OCtober 31 2012 Paae 22
Dr. WoodhuU
t
p1eIdioa camplains Ibout number ofthe u me. tbat B.-uses
lawstudents ..d unlicensed IlW Bebool paduIteI to draft his plCldinp, ww:11 u usiDB his
client-I pro plednpllDC! .1UbmiUiDI than to the COUJt u his OWl' work. Dr. Woodhull'. pro
Ie p1cl4inJ Ippelll at Exbibil2S
t
and ltates in pI11II'IPh I:
,
Bauer said that Jaw student David s.m. would be ..-Jdns on p,.mstho cIe&mes and
in ardor 10 _YO WoodhuU moM)'. eventhoup 1bia was tho UMudIorized
pmctice ofllw.
Dr. Woodhull described Mr. SIuer'S misoIYDY 08 paae 4. begiaftiDg It J*IIfIPb 12:
12.Afterthe hearing that day. walking down 1111 courthouIe ball with Attorney Bauer
AItomcy Bauer turned to WoodbuU. fllDCew David A. and IC81ed, "She iI
rather obnoxious. How do you put up with hw?"
KimMlx Pgt-Barry djeptlsBtd with Bohprt Jle B,.
Failed to DIOve acase torwant' _ "be tries to rack up a bill"
Kimberly Pruett-Bmy IDd hu'bInd William blred Mr. Bauer to IUD aaomoy Peecr R. McOrath.
K.im told me Je.. ,lei, sicA 10 II)' II01PJDC1t. ".."'tJ "",. .lsItIIa hIrmg"'" lIlY. aDd that Mr.
Bauer had I\ID up $40,000 bill and took all their savinp. Kim cmIiIcd Oatobctr 20, 2012
statiq, /JqIIer. He _jinll.ly/til,. 10 ,..". CI CAWjOrwtzrd", I,IrIItk Ite trlu to rack If' tI 6111.
Anp Whig HoWr fhpl RoIwt Beep. :"i..."
44J plan to raiIe the ROOF ofFthilmelll"
t
Motller dissatisfied client ofMr. Bluer, Anna Hods.. contIoIed me luI)' 8, 2011 by email
"help..i.I I hintd and ftmcl'-uer.ni.-...
t
'. AI1D8 Hodps hired_liter f1red Robert
Bluer u counJe1 ill libel cue. SUMp Hod. HeI,-v, AN. Dill HpdpL c.o No.. 38
20tG-CA-1423. BJahtJudicial Circuit, LeYy County. Ms. Hodpa bIIncwCOUDlOl DOW. and
bellev. Bauer should br broapt to jlllticc for misbandlqlaer cue, sratiJIs tel plan to ...
the I.OOF ofTtbis messt" (email 8V8iIable IIpOD iequat)
PlllIlla _ ..Ve 'ghm W, Brunt, DB fUe No.; 2012-00,146 (IB)
Mr. Strauss, 90, aid ofMr. Bauer "that bum took 1dvIntap"
Former client Philn, StraUlI .:ailed me JIIlUUY 4, 2012. 11.13 a.m. and comp1Iincd"
Robert BIIJ.lGr. Mr. Strauss &Iso made I Bar TFB File No.: 2012-00,146 (IB), Aupst
24, 2011. Mr. StrauI, ap 90, aid of Mr. Bauer ''that bum took 1dvaDtap" in tmall claims
court cae. with -loweffort attomc)' that me up oomp-l7" ancllOll tbe cae, claim
that involved a porch tbat had t'ba8u-, which his insuranee compll\)' deRied to repair.
Mr. Strauss also believ.. "die law I)'stan in Florida 11 for the binIa", and "they tab cuw oftheir
own. crooks orwba1evcr the)' lie, those are At 1110 time be caUed me, Mr. Strauss wa
livhte in New York with &mily, end had put hi. home in 0aiDcIviJJe up for sale. Mr. Strauss
10pp0Itn. CUllei Mr.....1110 ,,... pi.....U ..OWL .....'
..nto Mr....April 26. 2007 It 9:56&JIl, ..,..,... ., _ ,.would"" OIl 1111 pcrtiDIaI of"
pie..... Oillilpie mid." I W. Mprised 1DO, sIDoe1\VII..,,, Bluer $150,. how.......Olla'IIIIUle.
I I
J
Tbo Florida B8r. eompIajnt asainst Robert w. Bf-'. October 31. 2012 PIp - 23
said he is wiUIDI to make trip to Florida to help out in ..yIdionto bold Mr. Bauer
accountable. Mr. Snu. requested copy ofhis Bar compJlint, IinI;e his copy _ laft. behiJld in
OailtelYille. which I provided him by email. Mr. ,Snua eoncIudecI oaar call by tbaking me.
A diJital recording ofthe call illYaiJabic. (complaintclosedlfDlumc;Jea1 evidence).
DoCmntv v, RpIwt W, B.L'TFB Fill No 2012.QQ.M4(8b)
Pattcm ofComplaints by Elderi)' IIIcI Disabled CIieDIs
I
Anotber dissatidted client ofMr. Bauer filed Bar complaint, Jemp and BdY J)eCougcy y.
Bobm WI BMr. TFB File No. 2012-OO,OS4(Ib), July a. 2011. The complaint ...... that Ibc
QV DeCourseY' 118 disabledIIld elderly. end..Mr. Ballei' falled to properly reprud them in a
foreclosure matter. (complaint clolodllnsuftlclent evldDnce).
ConQhlliOD
Appeal pro I prevallod on Mr. RodcIDI' motion to cUlIIliIs and strike
t
wboD Judp RlobanI
Ni_1Ien entered 0nIer On DefClldalltl' Motion To DilDUll And Strib, JIl1UIl')' 13. 2006,
(Exhibit 1t). Judae Nielsen .ejected Rodem.' millcadina JqallIIJPDIlIIIt. faIJo "elaim- of
SSO,GOO in "court..warded fees _ oosts". Undir the 1.1doctrine orresjudioata. Mr. Ilodcms
wu 1RC1uded from ever apin IlleltinS. "claimS' for S5O,ooo in "couIt-eWllded fees act COlIS"
in dlis mader, claim or contentioo rejected by the Court as not meritorious.
I
Atlcr Ju.clF NicllCll Kjceted Mr. Rodems' mlsleWinzlepllqUlDCDt, hil"claim- for 150.000 In
rea and costs", this ouo WIll eslCldially decided In my favor. III NIpOIIiI to
certain der... Mr.1lodemI flied. vexatious libel Mr. RodmDs aIIo dilrupted the
tribuDa1 for Itra1eIiC acl'lIltIIc. AI result, 7. 20071 took volUD1ll)' diImiIIaI
without prejudice. ( moved to withdrawal m)' vo1wllry diaIIIlsal week lida' in the hopes of
findiDg counsel. Judge BIItoD pnted my pro to withdrawal my voIuntIry dilmilllJ,
qued by Mr. Bauer Auaust 1', 2001, 8IId affmfted oollppC'll1ln 2007-4530.
After that, Mr. Bauer'......tlon WIS ...... not competent. end DOt dflismt. wbicb
enaerecI JudIe Ba1DD. Mr. Bluer tied, ..Ide misteprolOlllations, and made millelclina lepl
8fIUIDeIl1l
l
to the B8r ill his responle August 18. 2010 to my ftnt compJaiDt. Mr. Baur failed to
report Mr. Rodcms' milCOllduct, and then enpPd in rICketeeriDa activity IIdoseribecl heroin.
(JiVeD tIlo serious and onsotna nature ofMr'. B_
f
mlaeoaduct widt me"his other cliont&,
die Bar.hould find problble C8IISe and teeoDUDelld
B..-'. disbarment to protect 1be public.

BYer)' document, email and bDSCriptmendoaed,in this compIIiDt ilayaillbJe. AU Mr. Bauer'.
hearillll weN 1mnIc:ribed. Pcnons .amed in this' complaint lie witnesses. Under peI1I1t)' of
perjury, I 4eclare the fOfllOins facts are true, ccx:rect. and complete. Thank you.

Nell J. GiUelpie
8092 SW II!th Loop
Ocala. Florida 34481
Encloans
Scm to the Florida BR October 31.2012 by Orollld, No. JZMS89FP290944350.

Rebuttal To Response of Robert W. Bauer, TFB 2013-00,540 (8B)

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Rebuttal To Response of Robert W. Bauer, TFB 2013-00,540 (8B)

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

VIA U.P.S. No.

1Z64589FP296200759 May 28, 2013

fee provided. by Rule 4-1.S(fJ(4XBXi). Mr.

B..-'. disbarment to protect 1be public.

Você também pode gostar