Written notice to the Bar that the June 8 complaint and supporting record were transmitted to the U.S. Department of Justice as a supplement to a pending civil-rights matter.
A status note confirms the reconsideration decision was postponed and that review resumes June 15, 2026.
A formal complaint to the Bar’s HR Director about the handling described throughout this record, copied to the Bar’s executive leadership and elected officers.
The Office confirms receipt of a new grievance, narrows the ADA-coordinator channel to accommodation requests only, and notes no determinations will issue that week.
How long the Office took to answer seven requests, and who got answered first, with published peer-state comparators showing what is normally available to complainants.
Sixteen documented institutional positions in forty-nine days, from the dismissal through the categorical Title II denial, listed by role and date.
One access request, three responses: a state office that owed nothing treated it as real and answered a thank-you in 19 minutes; the disciplinary body that owed a process treated it as a threat.
The Bar’s conduct tracked oversight: silence before the state ADA office was involved, performance while it watched, escalation once it was stripped from the thread.
The Bar’s conduct sorted into three columns: what it said that was not true, what it withheld, and what it did after each protected step.
A published Eleventh Circuit case and this matter share one office and one pattern across two protected classes, race and disability.
