Case 5:13-cv-00058-WTH-PRL Document 28 Filed 05/09/13 Page 1 of 2 PageID 847

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA OCALA DIVISION REVERSE MORTGAGE SOLUTIONS, INC., Plaintiff, -vsNEIL J. GILLESPIE AS CO-TRUSTEES, MARK GILLESPIE AS CO-TRUSTEES, OAK RUN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ELIZABETH BAUERLE, MARK GILLESPIE, NEIL J. GILLESPIE, DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION OF AMERICA, UNKNOWN SPOUSE, UNKNOWN SPOUSE, UNKNOWN SPOUSE, UNKNOWN SETTLORS AND/OR /BENEFICIARIES, UNKNOWN TRUSTEES, SETTLERS AND BENEFCIARIES, UNKNOWN TENANT IN POSSESSION 1 AND UNKNOWN TENANT IN POSSESSION 2, Defendants. _____________________________________/ ORDER This mortgage foreclosure action was filed in state court on January 9, 2013, and was removed to this Court by Defendant Neil J. Gillespie, acting pro se, on February 4, 2013 (Doc. 1). On March 19, 2013, the Court remanded the case to state court because this Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction (Doc. 19). The Court denied Mr. Gillespie’s motion to alter or amend judgment on April 12, 2013 (Doc. 24). Case No. 5:13-cv-58-Oc-10PRL

Case 5:13-cv-00058-WTH-PRL Document 28 Filed 05/09/13 Page 2 of 2 PageID 848

Mr. Gillespie has filed a Notice of Appeal (Doc. 23), and he has now moved for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal (Doc. 25). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), “[a]n appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith.” For the reasons stated in the Court’s Orders dated March 7, 2013 and April 12, 2013 (Docs. 19, 24), it is clear that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this matter, and therefore Mr. Gillespie’s appeal of the dismissal of his case on that ground is utterly frivolous. In addition, Mr. Gillespie seeks to raise several issues on appeal regarding the Court’s purported failure to sanction the Plaintiff under Fed. R. Civ. P. 11, failure to sustain Mr. Gillespie’s objections to the Magistrate Judge’s reports and recommendations, and failure of the Court to recuse itself (Doc. 23). The Court has also addressed these issues in its prior orders and found them to be without any legal merit. Therefore, Mr. Gillespie’s appeal of these issues is also frivolous. As such, the Court certifies that Mr. Gillespie’s appeal has not been taken in good faith, and his motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis (Doc. 25) is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. DONE and ORDERED at Ocala, Florida this 9th day of May, 2013.

Copies to:

Counsel of Record Neil J. Gillespie, pro se Maurya McSheehy
-2-

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful