What a federal appeals case alleged about the same office, set beside the disability record.
Mignott v. State Bar of Georgia Foundation, Inc., No. 24-10327 (11th Cir. July 30, 2025) — published opinion of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
Disposition: the dismissal was vacated and the case remanded for further proceedings; immunity was expressly reserved.
Defendants: the State Bar of Georgia Foundation, Inc., the State Bar of Georgia Office of the General Counsel, and an Assistant General Counsel.
Allegation: that the defendants “discriminated against her and other black attorneys by pursuing ‘fraudulent grievances’ against them and by subjecting them ‘to unequal grievance and disciplinary proceedings relative to their white peers.’”
Separately, the Georgia Supreme Court had tossed the underlying disciplinary case unanimously, finding the rules charged “do not apply to prospective clients.”
Two protected classes, one office, one pattern
| Alleged (race) | Documented (disability) |
|---|---|
| The Office of the General Counsel pursues “fraudulent grievances” against Black attorneys and subjects them to “unequal proceedings.” | The same Office lost a disabled complainant’s file after its own intake system confirmed receipt, then dismissed the grievance on a false non-receipt premise. |
| Black attorneys are sanctioned “even when the attorney provides a plethora of evidence showing that no violations alleged occurred.” | A grievance built on the solicitor’s own sworn words disappeared from the file. The Bar admitted the error twice in writing and never corrected the dismissal. |
| The intake and screening process operates differently depending on who is being protected and who is being processed. | The Bar’s ADA posture changed depending on whether the State ADA Coordinator was visible on the thread. Accommodations were granted when oversight was watching; coverage was denied when oversight was stripped. |
Two people. Two protected classes. The same Office of the General Counsel. The same intake and screening mechanisms. Within the past year.
Source: Mignott v. State Bar of Georgia Foundation, Inc., No. 24-10327 (11th Cir. 2025), published opinion and ABA Journal coverage; Bar correspondence of record. Individual party names redacted.
This is the record one disabled complainant built. You are not alone. Join the club.
[Español: pendiente]
Leave a Reply