State Bar of Georgia · ADA Access Diary · Day 13 of 25
I sent Shiptenko a stand-alone receipt-and-file-association confirmation request for the prior day's transmission. The Bar's Response@gabar.org sent an unsigned confirmation of the three portal grievances and laid out a restricted correspondence regime. (A Willard routing email is also logged this date in the record.)
What had to be true
For me to have to ask "whether the mail arrived," the Bar had to have no reliable, automatic confirmation for evidence sent outside the portal.
What I argued
- Receipt confirmation is now a disability accommodation, not a courtesy: it "is now an access safeguard for me, not an optional courtesy."
- The prior admission is the reason: "As a result of this misclassification, your submissions were not added to the grievance file at that time."
- "This is the institutional equivalent of asking whether the mail arrived."
What the Bar said
The unsigned Response@gabar.org email confirmed receipt of the three grievances and itemized what was received per grievance. It restricted the complainant's correspondence: "No request for information as to status, procedures, or other matters beyond a withdrawal or request to supplement will be processed," and suggested the complainant's reliance on a non-office address may have come from "an AI-generated summary answer for a search query." It reaffirmed the two granted accommodations and routed all accommodation requests to Shiptenko.
What it cost
I had to send a separate email solely to confirm delivery of my own evidence, the kind of redundant follow-up a working confirmation route would make unnecessary, and frame it explicitly as an access burden caused by the Bar's earlier loss.
The documents from this day
- The Bar confirmed it received three of my grievances
- I asked the Bar to confirm my evidence was received and placed in the file
Read the full story on the State Bar page. See the record in the document room.