v. COMES NO/; THE PLAINTIFF, Dr. Robert ^"'^and ... - PsychSearch

IW THE CIRCUIT COURT OF FLORIDA
FOR ALACHUA COUNTY, EIGHTH CIRCUIT
f~
ROBERT NEVILLE, M.D.
v.
PLAINTIFF, : :
CLIFFORD LEVIN, PhD
DEFENDNANT
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
i~
COMES NO/; THE PLAINTIFF, Dr. Robert ^"'^and AVERS as follows:
PARTIES
1. Robert Neville is a physician, Clifford Levin is a licensed
Clinical Psychologist who saw Neville as a patient.
JURISDICTION
2. The events complained of occurred in Alachua County Florida.
The damages sought exceed the limits aof the County Court, and since
I.njunctive Relief is sought, Circuit Court is the appropriate forum.
/SWORN ALLEGATIONS
3. In or about the period November 1994-January, 1995 Neville was
seen by Levin for a Forensic Psychologic Evaluation.
4. This Examination was requested by the Public Defender as part
of the defense of Neville against false charges of Battery.
5. Neville was informed by the Public Defender that he must
submit to this Examination, or the court would order it.
5. Neville appeared at the office of Levin who had him complete
various psychological tests, including the MMPI (Minnesota
Multiphasic Personality Profile).
00001

( f
This disparate treatment of rich and poor violated the
Constitutional Guarantee of Equal Protection
(XlVth Amendment).
By participating in this pseudo- judicial charade,
Levin violated
Neville's XlVth Amendment Right of Equal Proection under color of
State law, and is therefore liable under 42 U.S.C. 1983.
PRAYER
Based upon the foregoing Sworn Compalint and for the reasons
enumerated under the Causes of Action, Plaintiff prays for:
1. An Induction forbidding the practice of Forensic Examination
by Clinical Psychologists in the State of Florida until such time as
safeguards are instituted to protect those who erroneously received
and receive false diagnoses.
2. Damages for loss of income as shall be determined at trial.
3. Damages for Libel, Salnder and Defamation as shall be
determined by a jury.
4. An Order directin Defendant Levin to destroy all records of
his contact with Plaintiff Neville, including those reports mailed
5. Punitive Damages as shall be determined by a jury.
6. Expungement of all arrest and court records related to the
incident for which Plaintiff Neville became a victim of Levin, on the
basis of Fraud upon the Court.
7. Similar expungement of all records on Neville in which the
accuser
was a member f his family, on the basis of Fraud upon the
Court.
8. Such other relief as this Court shall deem appropriate.
OOO02

7. Levin then interviewed Neville at length. Levin also talked
to Neville's family members, who gave biased and false accounts of
his behavior to suit their own agendas.
8. There were no, or insufficient criteria at the time of
examination of neville by levin to diagnose Manic-Depressive
illness, according to established medical and psychological
criteria.
9. Nevertheless Levin diagnosed Neville as having a bipolar
disorder.
10. Levin also assigned some vague Personality Disorder diagnosis
to Neville, which a few months later he admitted was a false
diagnosis and which he withdrew, in a letter to the public
Defender.
11. Levin's false diagnoses prevented the public Defender from
mounting a vigorous defense against the false charges, a Neville
was forced to take a plea bargain which placed him on probation
for a year.
12. The probation mentioned ion #11, above, was non-transferable
to another state, and Neville lost job opportunities and his
freedom of travel for that year.
13. Neville's probation was illegally "violated" in about March-
April, 1995, and he spent two days in jail at a critical period
which as a result cost him valuable employment for the year 1996-
1997.
14. In October, 1996, Neville contacted Levin and asked for a
OOO03

eport which explained that Neville had not been found to have any
psycholgic or psychiatric disorder when Levin had examined him.
15. Levin agreed to supply a "summary" of his findings to Neville.
16. This "summary1 was a pack of lies which reinstated Levin's
false diagnoses of Personality Disorder, which diagnoses he had
previously written were unfounded.
it also continued to assert
that Neville had a bipolar disorder, for which Levin has never had
diagnostic criteria.
17. As a result of Levin's false "summary," neville was unable to
properly defend himself when his mother, Jessica neville had him
Baker-acted in an ex-parte proceeding befor County Judge Aymer
Curtin.
18. As a result of his lack of defense due to levin's worthless
and mendacious "summary," Neville was subjected to a three-day
stay in custody being psychologically evaluateed in October, 1996.
19. Neville was released from custody with no psychologic
diagnosis.
CAUSES OF ACTION
PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE
in doing the things described above, Levin committed
Professional Malpractice , in that he:
1. made diagnoses without factual bases.
2. Failed to properly evaluate the biases and agendas
of informants.
3. Failed to withdraw false diagnoses when confronted with
their falsity.
All this breached the Standard of Care for Clinical
Psychologists
00004

LIBEL, SLANDER, DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER
Alleagtions of mental illness are SLANDER, LIBEL AND
DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER PER SE .
The Defense of TRCJIh is unavailable to Defendant Levin.
The, allegations that Neville was mentally ill were not made in
good
faith, as Levin knew or should have known that he had no
genuine basis for them. Levin failed to adequately investigate
the truth or falsity of his claims before
recklessly making them.
INVASION OF PRIVACY 42 U.S.C. s. 1983
Whilst working as an agent of the State of Florida and/or the
County of Alcchua. Levin violated Neville's
Right to Privacy under
color of state law.
When Levin interviewed Neville it was obvious that Neville did
not ~. mee'ti'' Baker Act criteria for comrnittm,ent, nor die he qualify
under the M'Naughten rule as adopted by the State of Florida in
not knowing whether his alleged actions were right or wrong due to
mental impairment.. At this point Levin should have written a
report to the above effect, and closed his inquiry.
Instead, he
made unnecessary anJintrusive inquiry into Plaintiff's background;,
schooling,and obviously unideal family relationships.
In doing this, Levin invaded that zone of personal privacy
which the Supreme Court has recognized as inviolable, expressed
best by the Chief justice who said
, "it is the Right to be Left
Alone."
This "right to Privacy" is well-settled
to be implicit in the
Constitution of the United States.
OOO05

As a result of his violation of Plaintiff Neville's Civil Rights
in the manner described above, under color of State Law, levin is
liable for all the remedies associated with 42 U.S.C. 1983, including
being responsible for Plaintiff's attorney's fees in this action.
EQUAL PROTECTION
Also under 42 U.S.C. 1983, Levin particiapted in a scheme to treat
plaintiff neville differently thatn similar criminal accusees in that he
submitted him to a Forensic Examination whose outcome was predetermined
in that Levin virtually always assigns a negative psychological diag-.
nosis to those individuals unfortunate to be sent to him in some sort
of court-directed or Public Defender-directed procedure.
This
self-fulfilling prophesy of Levin-that anyone sent to him
in connection with a criminal accusation must be mentally
deranged
has resulted in a least dozens and perhaps hundreds of tainted
examinations by Lebvin, in which innocent people like Neville are
saddled with irrational and false psychological "diagnoses" which
adversely affect their options
for criminal defense by the public
Defender.
In Neville's case, his Public Defender, reading Levin's
false and self-fulfilling fantasy
report, abandoned all efforts to
defend Neville on the merits.
It later became evident that no crime had occured, even according
to the statement of the alleged victim, place in writing to the State
Attorney with a copy to the Public Defender.
An accussee with money, utilizing a private attorney, would not
be /submitted to Levin's dog-and-pony show, but would have received no
psychological examination or one which reflected his true lack of
pathology.
00006

VERIFICATION
I, the undersigned am the Plaintiff in this case. All facts set
out in the foregoing COMPLAINT are true to the best of my knowledge
and belief.
All Causes of Action have been carefully researched by
the undersignes and he represents them to reflect existing law or a
logical extension therof .
If Called upon to testify, the undersigned could do so
competently, as he has personal knowledge and copious documentation
relating to all allegations and claims,
I so attest, under penalty of perjuty under Florida and Federal
Law.
Executed, this 31st day of October, 1996, by:
PROOF OF FILING/SERVICE
Robert A. Neville, "~R7D.
1875 SW 35 Place
Gainesville, Fl 32608
(352) 335-6338 phone/fax
335-6931 phone/fax
This day, October 31, 1996, I filed this COMPLAINT in Circuit
Court at the Alachua County Courthouse, Gainesville, Florida.
I served the document either by Certified
Process Server, to be received within 48 hours.
Mail, or by Sheriff's
I so attest;
Robert A. Neville.
OOO07