Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
STATE OF FLORIDA
NEIL J. GILLESPIE
Petitioner,
vs.
BARKER, RODEMS & COOK, P.A. and
William J. Cook,
Respondents.
________________________________________/
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
APPENDIX, VOLUME 14
Respondents Representation of Petitioner in Florida Vocational Rehabilitation
Exhibit 1
Exhibit 3
Exhibit 4
Exhibit 5
Exhibit 6
Exhibit 7
2001, 03-27-01, Mr. Cook, Barker, Rodems & Cook, to Gillespie, re DVR
Neil J. Gillespie
1121 Beach Drive NE, Apt. C-2
St. Petersburg, Florida 33701-1434
Binder with the Fla. Vocational Rehabilitation web site printed out. (not current)
5.
Photo of me taken June 6, 1994 (at 150 pounds) before afilicted with depression
(current weight 290 pounds).
6.
Ne'.~f:~~
osure~ie""t
en
Ps. Bill, these are mostly original documents, please copy and return if needed. Thanks.
RECEIVED
MAR 2 2 2001
BY:
STATE OF FLORIDA
NEIL J. GILLESPIE,
Petitioner,
vs.
E~LOYMENT SECURITY,
Respondent.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -/
SECOND AMENDED PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING
Ligibe~
Vocational
Rehabilitation Consultant, hand delivered the letter to petitioner during a meeting at the
rd
Page - 2
Page - 3
in
October, 1994, he was promptly determined eligible for VR services on the basis of the
same medical and psychological data available to Florida DVR. Petitioner obtained a year of
college training through the Washington DVR progr~ and other services. Petitioner also
obtained a temporary speech prosthesis through Medicare.. After meeting all terms and
conditions of his plan, petitioner returned to his home in Florida where he currently resides.
Upon arriving in St. Petersburg petitioner again sought the VR services he needs to
obtain competitive employment consistent with his unique strengths, priorities, concerns,
abilities, capabilities, career interests, and informed choice. To facilitate the process,
petitioner obtained the assistance of a
pers~nal
Assistance Program has once again determined that respondent acted unlawfully toward
petitioner. CAP determined that the current case closure is unlawful. Petitioner has filed a
charge of disability discrimination against respondent with the EEOC because respondent
admits that it closed petitioners case because of its perception ofhis disability.
1. .
Page - 4
Page - 5
c.
Petitioner receives copies his DVR files and internal case notes.
1.
Page - 6
3.
Page - 7
iii. The IWRP was not labeled "for planning purposes only,"
and was presented to petitioner as a bona fide document
binding the agency. Moreover, petitioner was never notified
ofhis case closure pursuant to this IWRP, which provides for
services through February, 2003. (Exh. 2).
d. 6/1/94 "Mr. Gillespie contacts me and informs me not to close his
case as he will be returning to Florida."
i. Respondent is kept informed of petitioner's whereabouts
and his continued interest in vocational rehabilitation.
e. 6/10/94 "Mr. Gillespie contacts the office indicating he will be
returning to Florida We discussed at length the pros and cons of
coming back to Florida. Neil is still exploring options of moving to
the State ofWashingto~ where residency and VR services are more
liberal."
Page - 8
6.
Florid~
November,
Page - 9
7.
Page - 10
~4
li. Mr. Ligibel rejected petitioner's plea that the job was a
health hazard because the company ignored the Florida Clean
Indoor Air Act, FS 386. Mr. Ligibel's callous disregard for
petitioner's health inflicted psychological injury on him.
iii. Petitioner wants the record to reflect that he sued the cab
company pro se over the dismissal and prevailed at trial. A
copy of the Final Judgment is attached as Exhibit 5.
iv. Petitioner also wants the record to reflect that Florida
State Representative Margo Fischer supports petitioner's
position relative to the Florida Clean Indoor Air Act and the
cab company. A copy of her letter is attached as Exhibit 6.
Page - 11
B.
1.
its 1996 statistics show that only 21 individuals with speech disabilities were
rehabilitated out of a total of 8,850 persons rehabilitated. DVR speech
rehabilitation amounts to less that
3.
Page - 12
6.
against
and suffering, disability, mental anguis~ loss of capacity for the enjoyment
of life, loss of family association, expenses related to procuring replacement
vocational rehabilitation services, medical expenses, loss of earnings, loss of
ability to earn money, loss of benefit from participating in the vocational
rehabilitation program, including the loss of education, tuition, books,
supplies, career training, job placement services, and TJTC available under
petitioner's 1994 IWRP, and aggravation of a previously existing condition.
The losses are either permanent or continuing and petitioner will suffer the
losses in the future.
VII. Conclusion
Petitioner established that he is disabled and entitled to vocational rehabilitation
services. Both the federal government and the State of Washington promptly determined
petitioner eligible to receive, and benefit
fro~
services. Respondent stands alone in its unlawful and discriminatory treatment of petitioner
by denying him vocational rehabilitation services. In the administratIon of vocational
rehabilitation services, Respondent has failed to comply substantially with the plan.
Page - 13
funds because in the administration of the State plan there has been a failure to
comply substantially with provisions of the plan. (And to withhold funds until such
time as respondent fully complies with the State plan and 1973 Rehabilitation Act).
2.
Stop the closure of petitioner's case, provide him a change of counselor, and
prayer for relief: respondent shall compensate petitioner for his losses suffered,
under any of the following: the Americans with Disabilities Act (as amended), The
1973 Rehabilitation Act (as amended), the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as amended),
FS 760, Civil Rights, and any other means available.
4.
Page - 14
him to be "great", "reliable", and "one of her favorites", and that "Mr. Gillespie was
always available when she called and looks forward to working with him again."
5.
Tuition and books for petitioner's current studies at St. Petersburg Junior
Page - 15
Exhibit 2, provides for tuition, books, and supplies through May, 2002, provided he
maintain a 3.0 GPA Petitioner's GPA is 3.2. Petitioner demands $1,634.
9.
~411.
This
discriminatory acts including, but not limited to, tort law, the Americans with
Disabilities Act (as amended), The 1973 Rehabilitation Act (as amended), the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 (as amended), and FS 760 et seq., Civil Rights.
14.
psychological injury including, but not limited to, tort law, the Americans with
Disabilities Act (as amended), The 1973 Rehabilitation Act (as amended), the Civil
Page - 16
Rights Act of 1964 (as amended), FS 760 et seq., Civil Rights, and FS 415 et
seq., Adult Protective Services.
15.
Certificate of Service
I
~REBY
United States Express Mail, Return Receipt Requested, Article Number EI727514856US,
to: Michael A. Greif: Senior Attorney, Florida Department of Labor and Employment
Security, The Hartman Building, Suite 307, 2012 Capital Circle, S.E., Tallahassee,
32399-2189, this 7th day of June, 1998.
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
Page - 17
Florid~
Exhibit 1
December 4,1997
Neil Gillespie
1121 Beach Dr. N. E. Apt. C-2
St. Petersburg, FL 33701
Dear Neil:
During our meeting we thoroughly reviewed and discussed your evaluation reports. It has been
determined that you are not eligible for vocational rehabilitation services because your disability is too
severe at this time for rehabilitation services to result in. employment. This decision was reached
12/4/1997.
.
Should you not agree with this decision, you have the right to appeal. You have 21 days after receipt of
this letter to appeal by requesting, in writing, an Administrative Review with the District Director, Maria O.
Risco, Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, 4221 North Himes Avenue, Suite 205, Tampa, FI. 33607
6209.
In the event you are still not satisfied after the Administrative Review or you wish to skip the Administrative
Review, you may request a Fair Hearing conducted by the Division of Administrative Hearings by filing a
petition for a Fair Hearing with Ms. Tainara Allen, Director, Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, 2002 Old
St. Augustine Road, Bid. A, Tallahassee, FI. 32399-0696 within 21 days after your receipt of this letter or if
you had an Administrative Review, within 21 days after your receipt of the Administrative Review decision
letter.
If you need advice, assistance or an explanation of your rights, you may contact the Client Assistance
Program at 1-800/342-0823 (voice) or 1-8001346-4127(TDD). Their address is 2671 Executive Center
West, Suite 100, Webster Bid., Tallahassee, Florida 32301. This is a federally funded program to assure
that you understand your rights.
I believe that the following agencies could be of assistance to you and I would strongly encourage you to
contact them for help.
1. Suncoast Center for Community Mental Health 4040 Central Av. St. Petersburg, FL 327-7656 Individual
& Group Therapy
2. Directions for Mental Health 1437 Belcher Rd. Clearwater, FL Individual & Group Therapy
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
524-4464
:::'9Cb~
Exhibit 2
" ~:.
".
~"
..
NEIL GILLESPIE
GENERAL PRACTIONER
Post-Employment Services
Amendment
\);'
~
SERVICE(S)
dale
SURGERY DR.HABAL
MEDICAID/VR
MEDICAID/VR
HOSPITALIZATION
ANESTHESIA,LAB,XRAY MEDICAID/VR
MEDICATIONS MEDICAID/VR
S PEECH THERAPY MEDICAID/VR
COMPARABLE SERVICES
6/9'J
Bt94
a/94 ..
6/9~ ,i
~/95
Projected
end dale
6/95
6/95
6/95
6/95
12/95
STTBI~~ED
~O
YBC
llF'T'F'Q
~n.C'"
~FMF~"'F~
SERVICE{S)
dale
TUITION,BOOKS,SUPPLIES VR/PELLfGSL/CLIENT
COMPARABLE SERVICES
B~ginnin~ f
AND
BENEFITS:
9/94
Projecled
end dale
5/2002
PELL/GSL/CLIENT
EVALUATION CRITERIA: NEIL WILL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN EMPLOYMENT FOR 9 MONTHS
AS CONFIRMED BY CLIENT AND OR EMPLOYER REPORT DU~ING MONTHLY VR GUIDANCE
Projected
end date
SERVICE(S)
COMPARABLE SERVICES
AND BENEFITS:
NEIL GILLESPIE
~E~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~S~JALSECURI~
NO.~1_6_0_5_2_5_1_1_7~_
4 . OBJECTIVE:
EVALUATION CRITERIA:
SERVICE(S)
Beginning
Projected
date
end date
Beginning
Projected
date
end date
5 . OBJECTIVE:
EVALUATION CRITERIA:
SERVICE(S)
Please sign below to show that you have helped to develop thi,S,..,PtOQr'Cltm
(
Date
Date
PAGE 2
IWRP Attachment
My coun~elor
BII"aa'
A ~.
I am in agreement with
/_ C'
-.
c..-o~hefi.,T
Af-
/T
u".5
rh
tj..,'/'t
t'
Date
3i~7h~ Y'
Checklist
Rehabilitation technology
services were considered
and discussed:
Yes_ _
on-the-job
or related personal
assistant services.
yes
(see IWRP}
No~
employment services
was assessed.
yes
(see IWRP}
No_
yes
(see IWRP}
No_
~-
Not Appropriate
Exhibit 3
STATE OF FLORIDA
VOCATIONAL SCREENING
OF
Rm 145
813 893-2261
VOCATIONAL SCREENING
CLIENT INFORMATION:
Neil Gillespie is a 38 year old white male currently residing
at 266 7th Avenue, North, St. Petersburg, FI 33701. Mr. Gillespie's
disability is congenital cleft palate. He lives alone and does have
regular contact with his immediate family. He possesses a valid
drivers license and has independent transportation. He was a self
referral to the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation. He requested
assistance with medical treatment relating to repair of the cleft
palate and assistance in determining an appropriate vocational
direction. Mr. Gillespie has completed two years of college study
at the University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School of Business. He
maj ored in Business a t this time. Subsequently, Mr. Gillespie
worked as a car salesman and' progressed to owner of two separate
care dealerships in the Philadelphia area. These businesses were
later dissolved.
SCREENING RESULTS:
Mr. Gillespie has held a variety of positions in the past.
Most of these have been in the area of sales and business
management.
Past work history includes:
Utility worker
Manager/Owner Auto Dealership
Auto Salesperson
Assistant Manager Retail Trade
Laborer Steel Industry
3 months
98 months
48 months
36 months
10 months
TEST RESULTS:
WRAT-R2
READING
12+
SPELLING
12B
ARITHMETIC 7.4
BENDER-GESTALT
SUGGESTS AN INDIVIDUAL WITH TRENDS TOWARD HAVING HIS ENVIRONMENT
BOTH HOME AND WORK ORDERLY. THERE WERE SUGGESTIONS OF EXPANSIVE
TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL AND SOME SUGGESTION OF ACTING OUT BEHAVIOUR.
THESE WERE MINIMAL AND IF PRESENT COULD BE SEEN AS SOCIAL ACTIVISM
OR USE OF EXISTING PROCEDURES WITHIN COMPANIES, SOCIAL SERVICE
AGENCIES, ETC TO REDRESS GRIEVANCES.
USES-II
SEE GATB/USES SECTION
MYERS-BRIGGS
INTP exhibits great preC1Slon in thought & language. Continuous
intellectual scanning tends to see inconsistencies immediately. Has
excellent concentration. Authority does not impress the INTP;
dislikes redundancy. Desires to understand the universe and
constantly looks for universal laws & principles. Can become
intellectual snob & show impatience with those less endowed. This
is perceived as arrogance and generates hostility & defensive
behaviors from others. INTP is the mathematician, philosopher,
scientis t; any job requiring architecture of ideas; but INTP is not
interested in the implementation. Tend not to be sales people or
writers; make excellent teachers, but can be demanding on their
students. Not good at clerical tasks, impatient with routine
details. Prefer to work quietly, without interruption, and alone.
Do not welcome constant social activity or disorganization in the
home. The mate. of an INTP probably manages the social life. INTP
tends to retreat into books & emerges only when physical needs are
imperative. Has difficulty expressing emotions verbally; so the
mate may feel taken for granted. Home is usually calm, low key, and
well ordered. INTP deals with the environment primarily through
intui tion; thinking tends to be complicated and remains hidden
except in close associations; their reserve is difficult to
penetrate. This makes INTP difficult to know. Tend to be shy except
with close friends. Very adaptable until principles are violated.
Feeling qualities tend to be underdeveloped & make INTP insensitive
to the needs of others. About 1% of the population.
SHIPLEY
SHIPLEY RESULTS SHOW ESTIMATED IQ OF 93. THIS IS CONSIDERED TO BE
AN UNDERESTIMATE OF MR. GILLESPIE'S TRUE POTENTIAL. SOLID ABILITIES
EVIDENCED IN CULTURAL PART OF TASK. SLIGHT DIFFICULTY WITH ABSTRACT
PART OF SHIPLEY.
16PF
RESULTS SUGGEST AN INDIVIDUAL WITH HIGH NEED TO BE INDEPENDENT AND
FREE OF EXTERNAL CONSTRAINTS. THIS INDIVIDUAL MAY USES HIS FEELINGS
IN ORDER TO MAKE DECISIONS. HIGH INTERESTS IN HUMANITARIAN
ENDEAVOURS AND PRODUCTIVE CREATIVITY. INDICATIONS OF INTEREST SHOW
HOLLAND CODE TYPE (ASI)
I
GATE/USES
PART
NO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
RAW
SCORE
[ 49]
[ 18]
[ 22]
[ 31]
[ 33]
[ 11]
[ 30]
[ 70]
[ 90]
[ 94]
[ 29]
[ 28]
GGG
20
67
VVV
- A P T I T U DES
NNN SSS PPP 000 KKK
118
70
117
FFF
MMMM
123
67
26
19
58
101
23
72
42
57
OA
Ar
Sc
Pa
Pr
Me
In
BD
Se
Ac
Hu
LI
PP
##
OAP H
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
[Y]
[ ]
[Y]
[Y]
[Y]
[Y]
[Y]
[Y]
[Y]
[Y]
[Y]
[ ]
M
[ ]
[ ]
[Y]
[ ]
[Y]
[ ]
[Y]
[Y]
[ ]
[ ]
[Y]
[ ]
Score
Error
Score
Score
Score
Line
Line
Line
Line
Line
------------------------------------------------------------------------------APT SCORE
SEM
APT + SEM
DOT SCORE
DOT + SEM
High
Std.
Med.
High
Med.
CLUSTER
. I APT
COGNITIVE
-v-
-G-
-N- S
PERCEPTUAL
- P
-0-K
PSYCHOMOTOR
-F
-M-
* DOT RANGE
00\ - 10\ 1 10\ - 33\ 1 33\ - 67\ 1 67\ - 90\ 1 90\ - 100\
---+---+---+---+---+---+---+-*-+---+---+---+---+---+---+--
IGGG=======>1
1
VVV===>
I
NNN===>
1
1
- - - - - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - - - -
1
SSS===>1
I
PPP=======>
1
1
1
OQQ=======>
- - - - - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - - - -
KKK===>1
1
1
FFF=======>
1
1
IMMM=======>1
1
---+---+---+---+---+---+---+-*-+---+---+---+---+---+---+--
5-1 5=1 5+1 4-1 4=1 4+1 3-1 3=1 3+1 2-1 2=1 2+1 1-1 1=1 1+
===============================================================================
OAP
9
12
13
14
21
23
24
GOE-PG
27
57
57
59
88
108
110
25
26
27
28
29
MECHANICAL
05.09
MECHANICAL
05.10
MECHANICAL
05.10
MECHANICAL
05.11
MECHANICAL
05.12
*** MEDIUM APTITUDES
OAP GOE-INTEREST-AREA GOE-#
11 PLANTS & ANIMALS
03.01
22 MECHANICAL
05.07
Materials Control
5
34
Crafts
1-4
269
Crafts
5-6
148
Equipment Operation
All
130
Elemental Work: Mechanical
All
431
WITH AVERAGE INTERESTS (Inventory) ***
GOE-WORK-GROUP-TITLE
DATA JOBS
Managerial: Plants & Animals
1-3
49
Quality Control
1-2
.28
110
115
115
123
127
GOE-PG
51
104
079.101-022
070.101-022
RECOMMENDATIONS
This is a 38 year old white male with cleft palate which
significantly
affects
long
term
ability
to
use
verbal
communication. Repair or revision of the cleft palate to preserve
and remediate Mr. Gillespie's ability to speak is indicated. From
information obtained from his treating physician,
initial
assessment, transferable skills analysis, labor market survey, and
vocational testing it is this counselors' opinion Mr. Gillespie
will need retraining. Completion of a 4 year degree is indicated.
Should Mr. Gillespie have difficulty with college based training to
a degree which would make entry into the medical field not
feasible, it is suggested he examine areas such as counseling,
chemistry, and teaching.
Should you have any questions or if I may be of any further
assistance please do not hesitate to contact me at
DVR, 525 Mirror Lake Dr. RM 145, St. Petersburg, Fl 33701 Tel 813
893-2261.
Sincerely
I~ttd :J4~t~
Brad L. Meyer CRC
Senior VR Counselor
Exhibit 4
MARK S. KAMLEITER
A TIORNEY A T LAW
Courthouse Square
600 First Avenue N. - Suit. 206
Please be advised that I ha\'e been consulted by Mr. Neil J. Gillespie. Mr. Gillespie feels that
he has not been treated correctly by your division and he believes that your office may have
discriminated against him due to the particular nature of his disability.
I have reviewed Mr. Gillespie's file, including correspondence between himself, yourselfand
a Ms. Van Ess. I must be frank when I say that I can understand Mr. Gillespie's frustration and
irritation with the treatment he has received. I am not at this time entirely certain as to why he has
received this type of treatment, but I feel that Mr. Gillespie deserves more direct and courteous
treatment. This being the case I would like to request several things:
1. That Mr. Gillespie's letter Ms. Van Ess, dated January 16, 1997, be disregarded to the
extent that it may be interpreted as withdrawing his prior request for services. Mr. Gillespie
rema~s determined to seek and obtain the vocational rehabiliative services that he has a right
to.
2. Mr. Gillespie expects that the Individualized Written Rehabilitation Program produced by
your office (3/24/94) and which took nine months of effort on Mr. Gillespie's part to get
produced, be implemented. If for any reason your office C8IU1ot or will not implement this
plan, then I expect to be notified of that decision and the reasons therefore.
3. That a correction to Ms. Van Ess's letter dated 1/15197 be made with an appropriate
apology to Mr. G~ll~spie. This letter was clearly offensive, suggesting dishonesty and lack of
cooperation on Mr. Gillespie's part. If Mr. Gillespie's application is examined it is very clear
that Mr. Gillespie info~ed your office ~at his disabilities were related to "Velopharyngeal
incompetence, Personality Disorder (Schizoid)" (overweight & high BP)." This would make
Ms. Van Ess's assertion that Mr. Gillespie had not truthfully indicated his "mental health
issues." Mr Gillespie's Social Security disability letter indicated only the recognition ofhis
disability and not the grounds for the recognition. In any case the fact of Mr. Gillespie's
Sincerely,
Mark S. Kamleiter
Exhibit 5
,",
INST # 98-037481
FEB 6, 1998 9:21PM
NEIL J. GILLESPIE.
Plaintiff(s),
vs.
CASE NO.97-7329SC
FINAL JUDGMENT
,"
:::~ :~
.. -'
, :"
......
~~ :::
;.; == <'1-";'
THIS CAUSE having come up for trial, non jurY',~q~".,.,
:::!
, ::J
--.::
.,.,
;-r")
aJ
f
,:;- -'
-0
January 29, 1998 and the Court having heard testimony ~ib~
C1
~ \"~"'"
~~
copies to:
Neil J. Gillespie
Yellow Cab Company
of St. Petersburg, Inc.
:-i
Exhibit 6
REPRESENTATIVE, DISTRICT
52
April 6, 1998
NIr. Neil J. Gillespie
1121 Beach Drive NE, Apt. C-2
~. O~
MF/cef
COMMITTEES: EciJcation K-12, Environmental Protection, Law Enforcement & Public Safety
Exhibit 7
Page 1 of2
Page 20f2
Exhibit 8
AGENCY
CHARGE OF DISCRIMINATION
CHARGE NUUBER
Th1s form 1s affected by the Pr1vacy Act of 1974; See Pr1vacy Act Statement before 0 FEPA
IX) EEOC
complet1ng th1s form.
and EEOC
(81~) 82~-2"1qo
STREET ADDRESS
Aoartment C-2
DATE OF BIRTH
St. PetersburQ:
FL "1"1701
0~/1q/56
NAIIE
STREET ADDRESS
STREET ADDRESS
Cat D (501 +)
FL
St. Petersburll
~~70"1
COUNTY
10"1
NAIIE
DRACE
COLOR
RelIGION
NATIONAL ORIGIN
DSEX
RETALIATION
IX] DISABILITY
OTHER (Spectt;y)
DAGE
COUNTY
EARLIEST
12/04/91
0
LATEST
CONTINUING ACTION
I. Personal Harm:
I want th1s charge f1led w1th both the EEOC and the State or NOTARY (When necessary for State and Local Requ1rements)
address or telephone number and cooperate fully w1th them 1n the I swear or aff1rm that I have read the above Charge and that
.,.."oot.
DatJ
EEOC FORM
:l
(Rev.
06/92)
STATE OF
FLORIDA
CASE NAIlE
CITY/COUNTY OF
St.
CASE NUMBER
Petersburg/Pinellas
Gillespie vs State 0
AFFIDAVIT
being first duly sworn upon my oath affirm and hereby say:
(Name)
I have been given assurances by an Agent of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that this
Affidavit will be considered confidential by the United States Government and will not be disclosed as long as
the case remains open unless it becomes necessary for the Government to produce the affidavit in a formal
proceeding. Upon the closing of this case, the Affidavit may be subject to disclosure in accordance with
Agency policy.
(sex)
Iresideat
(race)
City of
St.
State of
Pe t e r s burg
, County of
---=-P-=i:.=.n.:.;:e::..:l=l=-a=s
--'F'-"L==--
....3,--~2=-3.L.9LO~_
which is
(Name of Union/Company/Agency)
located at
St. Petersburg
My job classification is ( I f
FL
33703
(Zip)
(State)
(City)
applicable)
....,.,....,:--:-.,--,-
(job tit/e)
My immediate supervisor is ( I f
appl icable)'_.....I...;c:-;----:-
---:"....,-:-:-:;--;--
(Name)
(job tit/e)
K !l;f~
(ijitia/s)
'V
Page 1 of _ _
STATE
_
St. Petersburg/Pinellas
OF _ _--"-F.::L:.>::O~R:.=I:.=D~A~
CITY/COUNTY OF
CASE NAME
CASE NUMBER
AFFIDAVIT (cent.)
'2--h,andwritten 0
I have read and had an opportunity to correct this Affidavit consisting of
typed g pages and swear that these facts are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
.:I1z e
( 9 r.~
--.
AfF-B (6/211969)
X ~f/~r---
STATE OF FLORIDA
NEIL J. GILLESPIE,
Petitioner,
vs.
Case No. 98-066-DVR
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND
EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, DIVISION
OF VOACTIONAL REHABILITATION,
Res ondent.
I. Interest in Action
Petitioner is Neil J. Gillespie, 1121 Beach Drive NE, Apt., C-2, St. Petersburg,
Florida, 33701-1434. Respondent's determination affects petitioner's substantial interests
by denying him the vocational rehabilitation services he needs to return to employment.
Rehabilitation Consultant, hand delivered the letter to petitioner during a meeting at the
DVR office located at 3251 3ed Ave. North, St. Petersburg, Florida.
WHEREFORE petitioner demands that respondent stop the closure of his case,
provide a change of counselor, and implement the IWRP attached hereto as Exhibit 2.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that a copy hereofhas been furnished to Michael A. Greif: Office ofthe
General Counsel, The Hartman Bldg., Suite 307, 2012 Capital Circle, S.E., Tallahassee,
32399-2189, by first class mail, postage prepaid, this 2nd day of July, 1998.
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
Exhibit 1
CIMIwIt., Fl33784
December 4,1997
Neil Gillespie
1121 Beach Or. N. E. Apt. C-2
St. Petersburg, FL 33701
Dear Neil:
During our meeting we thoroughly reviewed and discussed your evaluation reports. It has been
determined that you are not eligible for vocational rehabilitation services because your disability is too
severe at this time for rehabilitation services to result in employment. This decision was reached
1214/1997,
.
Should you not agree with this decision, you have the right to appeal. You have 21 days after receipt of
this letter to appeal by requesting, in writing, an Administrative Review with the District Director, Maria O.
Risco, Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, 4221 North Himes Avenue, Suite 205, Tampa, FI. 33607
6209.
In the event you are still not satisfied after the Administrative Review or you wish to skip the Administrative
Review, you may request a Fair Hearing conducted by the Division cA Administrative Hearings by filing a
petition for a Fair Hearing with Ms. Tainara Allen, Director, Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, 2002 Old
St. Augustine Road, Bid. A, Tallahassee, FI. 32399-0696 within 21 days after your rapt of this letter or if
you had an Administrative Review, within 21 days after your receipt of the Administrative Review decision
letter.
If you need advice, assistance or an explanation of your rights, you may contact the Client Assistance
Program at 1-8001342-0823 (voice) or 1-800/346-4127(IDD). Their address is 2671 Executive Center
West, Suite 100, Webster Bid., Tallahassee, Florida 32301. This is a federally funded program to assure
that you understand your rights.
I believe that the following agencies could be of assistance to you and I would strongly encourage you to
contact them for help.
1. Suncoast Center for Community Mental Health 4040 Central Av. St. Petersburg, FL 327-7656 Individual
& Group Therapy
2. Directions for Mental Health 1437 Belcher Rd. Clearwater, FL Individual & Group Therapy
524-4464
8. If your condition changes and you believe you are ready to secure employment you may reapply for
services. In any event your record will be reviewed in one year to determine the feasibility of you
returning to work.
Sincerely,
::"9~b~
_'. "_ .. ,
'.~
.,.. ,
-~
,_ ..
~;
.'-:- 1".,..,
,;,.
,~
..
Exhibit 2
_.
.( 'r: ...
=====~~//"""'INDlVIDUALIZED WRI~EN
NAME
.~
NEIL GILLESPIE
'.
REHABILITATION PROGRAM
.
GENERAL PRACTIONER
Post-Employment Services
Amendme.nt
1. OBJECTIVE:
..
SERVICE(S)
3/9i
~t94
~/94 .
3/9~ :
~/95
Projected
end dale
6/95
6/95
6/95
6/95
12/95
/' h-..'
PELL/GSL/CLIENT
-c}
/"
'
Projected
end date
~ME_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'_S~~LSECU~~NQ~1_6_0_5_2_5_1_1_7~_
4. OBJECnVE:
EVALUATION CRITERIA:
Beginning
SERVICE(S)
date
Projected
end date
5 OBJECTIVE:
EVALUATION
CRITERIA:
SERVICE(S)
Beginning
date
Projected
end date
/
\
'-.
--------
Please sign below to show that you have helped to develop thil~gyrCllJlI
Date
Date
'
'.'
-.- -
-..... - . , .
......
_..
PAGE 2
IWRP Attachment
e"-ad ~ ~
and I have discussed my rights
and duties as they relate to this program. I am in agreement with
this program.' .
My counselor
?d ~C'/1.hed ~'I--
Yh,...5 f-,-~
t"
Checklist
Rehabilitation. technology
services were considered
and discussed:
Yes_ _
on-the-job
or related personal
assistant services.
No~
employment services
was assessed.
No_
Yes_ _ (see
IWRP}
No_
~-
Not Appropriate
Exhibit 3
~~
..
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT SECURITY
VOCATIONAL SCREENING
OF
VOCATIONAL SCREENING
CLIENT INFORMATION:
Neil Gillespie is a 38 year old white male currently residing
a.t 266 7th Avenue, North, St. Petersburg, FI 33701. Mr. Gillespie's
disability is congenital cleft palate. He lives alone and does have
regular contact with his immediate family. He possesses a valid
drivers license and has independent transportation. He was a self
referral to the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation. He requested
assistance with medical treatment relating to repair of the cleft
palate and assistance in determining an appropriate vocational
direction. Mr. Gillespie has completed two years of college study
at the University of pennsylvania, Wharton School of Business. He
maj ored in Business at. this time. Subsequently, Mr. Gillespie
worked as a car salesman and progressed "to owner of two separate
care dealerships in the Philadelphia area. These businesses were
later dissolved.
SCREENING RESULTS:
Mr. Gillespie has held a variety of positions in the past.
Most of these have been in the area of sales and business
management.
Past work history includes:
Utility worker
Manager/Owner Auto Dealership
Auto Salesperson
Assistant Manager Retail Trade
Laborer Steel Industry
3
98
48
36
months
months
months
months
io months
TEST RESULTS:
WRAT-R2
READING
12+
SPELLING
12B
ARITHMETIC 7.4
BENDER-GESTALT
SUGGESTS AN INDIVIDUAL WITH TRENDS TOWARD HAVING HIS ENVIRONMENT
BOTH HOME AND WORK ORDERLY. THERE WERE SUGGESTIONS OF EXPANSIVE
TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL AND SOME SUGGESTION OF ACTING OUT BEHAVIOUR.
THESE WERE MINIMAL AND IF PRESENT COULD BE SEEN AS SOCIAL ACTIVISM
OR USE OF EXISTING PROCEDURES WITHIN COMPANIES, SOCIAL SERVICE
AGENCIES, ETC TO REDRESS GRIEVANCES.
USES-II
--.::...-.. U
'.
".-,0-
-- .,.,., ....
'"
...
..
PART OF SHIPLEY.
16PF
RESULTS SUGGEST AN INDIVIDUAL WITH HIGH NEED TO BE INDEPENDENT AND
FREE OF EXTERNAL CONSTRAINTS. THIS INDIVIDUAL MAY USES HIS FEELINGS
IN ORDER TO MAKE DECISIONS. HIGH INTERESTS IN HUMANITARIAN
ENDEAVOURS AND PRODUCTIVE CREATIVITY. INDICATIONS OF INTEREST SHOW
HOLLAND CODE TYPE (ASI)
i
GATB/USES
PART
NO
1
2
3
4,
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
RAW
SCORE
[ 49]
[ 18]
[ 22]
[ 31]
[ 33]
[ 11]
[ 30]
[ 70]
[ 90]
[ 94]
[ 29]
[ 28]
\..:::..
GGG
20
67
VVV
- A P T I T U DES
NNN SSS PPP QQQ KKK
118
70
117
FFF
MMMM
123
67
26
19
58
101
23
72
42
57
OA
Ar
Sc
Pa
Pr
Me
In
BD
Se
Ac
Hu
LI
PP
##
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
OAP
H
[Y]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[Y]
[Y]
[y]
[ ]
[Y]
[Y]
[Y]
[Y]
[Y]
[Y]
[y]
[ ]
[Y]
[Y]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[Y]
[Y]
[ ]
High
Std.
Med.
High
Med.
Score
Error
Score
Score
Score
Line
Line
Line
Line
Line
---------------------------- .. _ .. _--------------------------------------------- .
G.A.T.B. APTITUDE GRAPH
===============================================================================
I
CLUSTER
1------------1
I COGNITIVE
I
1------------I
I PERCEPTUAL
I
1------------I
I PSYCHOMOTOR
I
APT
-G-
-V-N-
- S
-P
-Q-K
-F
-M-
1-------------+--I
* DOT RANGE
00,\ - 10\ I 10\ - 33\ I 33\ - 67\ 1 67\ - 90\ I 90\ - 100\ I
---+---+---+---+---+---+---+-*-+---+---+---+---+---+---+---1
1
I
I GGG=======> I
I
I
I
I
VVV===>
I
NNN===>
I
I
I
I
- - - - - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - - - --I
I
1
I
SSS===>1
1
I
1
I
PPP=======>
I
I
I
I
QQQ=======>
I
- - - - - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - - - - -+- - - - - - - - - --I
I
1
KKK===> I
I
I
I
1
FFF=======>
I
I
I
I MMM=======> 1
I
I
---+---+---+---+---+---+---+-*-+---+---+---+---+---+---+---1
5 - I 5= I 5+ 1 4 - I 4= I 4+ I 3 - I 3= I 3+ 1 2 - I 2= I 2+ 1 1- I 1= I 1+ I
===============================================================================
COMMON APTITUDE-INTEREST OVERLAP REPORT
OAP
9
12
13
14
21
23
24
...
..,
/7
,,
GOE-PG
27
57
57
59
88
108
110
, .
'..
'
MECHANICAL
05.09
MECHANICAL
05.10
MECHANICAL
05.10
MECHANICAL
05.11
MECHANICAL
05.12
*** MEDIUM APTITUDES
OAP GOE-INTEREST-AREA GOE-#
11 PLANTS & ANIMALS
03,01
22 MECHANICAL
05.07
25
26
27
28
29
Materials Control
5
34
Crafts
1- 4
269
Crafts
5 -6
148
Equipment Operation
All
130
Elemental Work: Mechanical
All
431
WITH AVERAGE INTERESTS (Inventory) ***
GOE-WORK-GROUP-TITLE
DATA JOBS
Manaqerial: Plants.& Animals
1-3
49
Quality Control
1 - 2 28
110
115
115
123
127
GOE-PG
51
104
079.101-022
070.101-022
RECOMMENDATIONS
This is a 38 year old white male with cleft palate which
significantly affects
long
term
ability
to
use
verbal
communication. Repair or revision of the cleft palate to preserve
and remediateMr. Gillespie's ability to speak is indicated. From
information obtained from his treating physician,
initial
assessment, transferable skills analysis, labor market survey, and
vocational testing it is this counselors' opinion Mr. Gillespie
will need retraining. Completion of a 4 year degree is indicated.
Should Mr. Gillespie have difficulty with college based training to
a degree which would make entry into the medical field not
feasible, it is suggested he examine areas such as counseling,
chemistry, and teaching.
Should you have any questions or if I may be of any further
assistance please do not hesitate to contact me at
DVR, 525 Mirror Lake Dr. RM 145, St. Petersburg, FI 33701 Tel 813
893-2261.
Sincerely
/.~ttd.}.11t~
Brad L. Meyer CRC
Senior VR Counselor
STATE OF FLORIDA
NEIL J. GILLESPIE,
Petitioner,
vs.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND
EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, DIVISION
OF VOACTIONAL REHABILITATION,
Respondent.
Petitioner Neil Gillespie is not eligible for vocational rehabilitation services because his
disability is too severe at this time for rehabilitation services to result in employment.
(See, Petitioner's Third Amended Petition For Administrative Hearing, Paragraph III,
Disputed Issues ofMaterial Fact).
3.
Page - 1
read for its plain meaning. (See, Petitioner's Third Amended Petition For Administrative
Hearing, Exhibit 1).
5.
Respondent has not met its burden of proof by "clear and convincing"
evidence that Petitioner is too severely disabled at this time for rehabilitation services to
result in employment. Furthermore, Petitioner believes that Respondent's action is further
Page - 2
evidence of systemic problems at the Florida DVR. The Advocacy Center for Persons
with Disabilities, Inc., a public interest law finn mandated by federal law, determined that
"Florida's Division of Vocational Rehabilitation (DVR) is entrenched in a conscious
decision to deceive the public and individuals with disabilities." (Advocacy Center's
Client Assistance Program Annual Report, FY 1996-97, Directors Comments, Attached
hereto as Exhibit B).
8.
Because no disputed issues of material fact exist, Petitioner is due the relief
requested in his Third Amended Petition For Administrative Hearing as a matter of law.
Dated this 2nd day of October, 1998.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that Petitioner's Motion for Final Surnma.ty Order hereof was filed by fax
with J. Lawrence Johnston, Administrative Law Judge, Division of Administrative
Hearings, DeSoto Building, 1230 Apalachee Parkway, Tallahassee, FL 32399-1550; and
also faxed to Michael A. Gren: Office of the General Counse~ The Hartman Bldg., Suite
307,2012 Capital Circle, S.E., Tallahassee, 32399-2189, on October 2, 1998.
Page - 3
Exhibit A
Mr. Gillespie
c1aim~ to
lUI
incorporating this separate ground for case closure is being sent to Mr.
Gillespie.
Page - ~
Exhibit B
DIREcrOR'S COMMENTS
Florida's Division ofVocatiooal Rehabilitation (DVR) is entrenched in a conscious decision
to deceive the public and individuals with disabilities. DVR is content with turning its back on the
very individuals the Rehabilitation Act was designed to protect by denying equal access to a full
range of services for individuals with the most severe disabilities. Evidently, DVR believes that
individuals with most severe disabilities do not reside in institutions or resaictive environments,
such as Developmental Services Institutions (DSIs), Mental Health Institutions (MHIs), Assisted
!lYing Facilities (ALFs), group homes, and nursing homes and sheltered workshops, or that they
have no vocational rehabilitation value. This is despite irrefutable proof in more proactive states
that a.full range of comprehensive rehabilitation services and adequate supported employment
promote independent living, community integration, and successful rehabilitation. This would be
hard but rewarding work for DVR. It would take innovative proactive leadership, well-coordinated
outreach, and a will to comply with the letter of the law which does not currently exist.
The Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) should not take the Client Assistance
Program's (CAP's) documentation or word alone on this question of compliance with the need to
go to an order of selection. RSA need only to survey the institutions and resaictive environments
mentioned above or talk to individuals with the most severe disabilities who are forced to live and
die there. Florida's Protection and Advocacy Programs (p&As) are also ready, willing, and able
to provide substantial verification of this systemic abrogation of individual rights.
CAP was pleased to receive RSAs Policy Directive 97-04 concerning employment goals of
individuals with disabilities which affirms the intent and spirit of the law. Unfortunately, Florida's
DVR appears to reject this policy directive, or at best, considers it optional. DVR's lack of
enthusiasm or will to enforce the directive is evidenced by the fact that they have not widely
distributed it or trained staff on their responsibility to comply. Is this because DVR can't serve all
eligible individuals with disabilities or is this merely another tactic to deny meaningful career
choices as a cost saving measure? CAP has handled numerous requests from conscientious DVR
field staff who were unable to get the policy directive from their own state office. CAP has also
had to repeatedly respond to DVR's bureaucratic quagmires in the erratic distribution of funds
resulting in interruptions or denials of rehabilitation services around the state. DVR field staff
remain fearful of retribution from its own office by reporting this or any other systemic problems
with their agency. CAP looks forward to its challenge in promoting responsible and compliant rule
promulgation with DVR through the administrative procedures process. We certainly hope that
RSA will review and comment on DVR draft rules as well.
Although the bulle of complaints that come to CAP continue to be against DVR, we will also
be focusing more attention in the coming fiscal year to the provision of vocational rehabilitation
services to individuals with the most severe disabilities who may be denied equal access with the
Di"ision of Blind Services (DBS) such as underserved or previously not served individuals with
blindness and developmental and mental health disabilities forced to live in restrictive environments
as disC'.lSSed with DVR. CAP will also be reviewing the Business Enterprise Program specific uses
of Rehabilitation Act funds.
7'
STATE OF FLORIDA
NEIL J. GILLESPIE,
Petitioner,
vs.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND
EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, DIVISION
OF VOACTIONAL REHABILITATION,
Res
ndent.
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Petitioner pro se, NEIL J. GILLESPIE, hereby
files this Notice of Withdraw of Request for Formal Hearing pursuant to Rule 60Q-2.036,
F.A.C., and states as follows:
1.
requests for agency action at issue in this proceeding. (Rule 60Q-2.036, F.A.C.).
2.
Respondent has not made a sincere effort to settle this matter, and in
essence offered only to act lawfully in future dealings with Petitioner. Also, Respondent
has refused to comply with, or adequately respond to, Petitioner's discovery requests; and
Respondent's vendor, the Boley Center, provided incomplete discovery responses to
Petitioner's subpoena duces tecwn.
Page - I
o
3.
Petitioner objects to the fact that his properly filed Motion for Summary
Petitioner's doctor suggests he not pursue DVR services, and believes that
continued contact with DVR is detrimental to his well-being. Petitioner will proceed with
his own, unilateral rehabilitative efforts.
5.
which are beyond the jurisdiction ofthis tribunal. Those matters include, but are not
limited to, tort and discrimination claims, and constitutional issues. In the interest of
economy to this tribunal and the parties, Petitioner will consolidate his claims and pursue
them in United States Federal District Court at the appropriate time.
DATED this 9th Day ofNovember, 1998.
Respectfully Submitted,
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that a copy hereof was mailed November 9, 1998, to Michael A. Gren:
Office ofthe General Counsel, The Hartman Bldg., Suite 307, 2012 Capital Circle, S.E.,
Tallahassee, 32399-2189.
Page - 2
o
STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
NEIL J. GILLESPIE,
)
)
Petitioner,
)
)
vs.
)
)
)
)
)
)
Respondent.
------------------)
\~
~
!
diJ~i", L-.
LAWRENCE JOHNSTON
Administrative Law Judge
Division of Administrative Hearings
The DeSoto Building
1230 Apalachee Parkway
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060
(850) 488-9675
SUNCOM 278-9675
Fax Filing (850) 921-6847
~v(~_,Jt::r-.-.)
Divisio~of
COPIES FURNISHED:
Neil J. Gillespie
1121 Beach Drive, Northeast
Apartment C-2
St. Petersburg, Florida 33701-1432
STATE OF FLORIDA
NEIL J. GILLESPIE
Petitioner,
vs.
Security
("Department").
The
Department
has
adopted
Filed this
/7
/,
/r--,
/~
\ / /7 J.L~
11,dfL~~';d1
~:tf~
______________
Nelda J. Atldhsolll', C1er
DepartmeriW/Labor and Employment Security
NOTICE OF APPEAL RIGHTS
This order is final agency action. Judicial review of final agency action may be
had by filing notices of appeal in both the appellate district where the petitioner
resides and with the clerk of the Department within 30 calendar days of the date
this order is filed in the official records of the Department. 120.68, F.S.; Fla. R. App.
P. 9.110. UNLESS A NOTICE OF APPEAL IS TIMELY FILED, NO FURTHER REVIEW IS
PERMITIED. Copies furnished: Neil J. Gillespie, 1121 Beach Dr., NE, Apt. C-2, St.
Petersburg, FL 33701-1432; Michael A. Greif, Office of the General Counsel,
Hartman Bldg., Suite 307,2012 Capital Circle S.E., Tallahassee, FL 32399-2189.
AlTORNEYS AT LAW
CHRIS A. BARKER
RYAN CHRISTOPHER RODEMS
WILLIAM J. COOK
Telephone 813/4891001
Facsimile 813/4891008
March 27,2001
Neil 1. Gillespie
Apartment C-2
1121 Beach Drive NE
St. Petersburg, Florida 33701-1434
Re:
Vocational Rehabilitation
Dear Neil:
I am enclosing the material you provided to us. We have reviewed them and, unfortunately,
we are not in a position to represent you for any claims you may have. Please understand that our
decision does not mean that your claims lack merit, and another attorney might wish to represent you.
If you wish to consult with another attorney, we recommend that you do so immediately as a statute
oflimitations will apply to any claims you may have. As you know, a statute oflimitations is a legal
deadline for filing a lawsuit. Thank you for the opportunity to review your materials.
William 1. Cook
WJC/mss
Enclosures