May 14, 2026: The Cure Window Closed With Zero of 28 Items Cured

Mr. Willard, President Twyman, and all Bar staff copied here:

The cure window established in my May 11 letter closed today, May 14, 2026, at 5:00 PM ET. Twenty-eight items were identified. Four violations were documented. Zero items have been cured.

I sent the executive summary to Mr. Willard and President Twyman earlier today. This email goes to the full institutional distribution because everyone on this thread deserves to see the same record, and because I genuinely cannot figure out what is happening inside your institution.

I am asking this as plainly as I can: is the Bar experiencing internal disagreement, a leadership vacuum, or a deliberate good-cop/bad-cop strategy directed at a disabled complainant and the regulators monitoring this record?

Because from where I sit, no reasonable person could make sense of what happened this week. I have a disability. I am not stupid. And what I watched happen over the past ten days does not add up.

In the Past 24 Hours Alone, the Bar Has Misled Me Five Times

Five representations in 24 hours. A meeting that was never real. A review that produced nothing. A “tomorrow” that did not arrive. Each one bought time. None produced a substantive response.

That is not dysfunction. That is a failure of professional obligations by the Bar’s own lawyers — and a failure to make reasonable efforts to ensure other lawyers conform to the Rules of Professional Conduct. This is simply unbelievable considering what I am currently dealing with between my health and [detail about a family member removed]. It is nothing anyone would tolerate from the Bar if it involved their disabled friends or family.

The Scoreboard

The CC-Stripping Pattern

Six emails. The State ADA Coordinator’s Office was stripped from every single one. Three officials, same exclusion, same 24-hour window. The one external oversight body watching this process was removed from the conversation by the people being watched.

The Silence

Seven officials. Two engaged. One denied. Four silent. [Editor’s note, October 23, 2026: this count failed later verification and is withdrawn.] Yesterday I was getting play-by-play updates from multiple officials. Today — the day the cure window closed — silence.

The Contradiction That No One Has Explained

May 13, 12:08 PM — Shiptenko: “The State Bar has approved your accommodation request.”

May 12, 2:12 PM — NeSmith (less than 24 hours earlier): “The State Bar is not a public entity subject to the ADA.” [The May 12, 2026 email reads: “The State Bar of Georgia is not a public entity, such as a federal, state or local government department or agency.”]

One official grants accommodations under the ADA framework. Another official denies the Bar is subject to the ADA. Both said it in writing. Both are on the record. No one at the Bar has reconciled these two positions.

On the same day, the Georgia State ADA Coordinator’s Office responded on the full institutional CC list, confirmed the Bar’s ADA obligations for its “programs, services, and activities,” and confirmed she had contacted the Bar directly. That office treated the matter as legitimate. The Bar stripped that office from every response sent the same day.

Where This Leaves Me

My surgery has been postponed because I was unable to clear preop requirements. [detail about a family member removed] I have thirteen medical appointments between now and the end of the month. I do not have time to decode whether the State Bar of Georgia is experiencing an internal policy disagreement, a leadership failure, or a coordinated strategy to exhaust a disabled complainant into abandoning his “dismissed” grievance.

But I should not have to. A reasonable person — let alone a person with a disability navigating this process with assistive technology — cannot look at the record above and determine who speaks for the Bar, what the Bar’s position is on ADA access, whether the April 10 dismissal stands, or what happens next.

Please identify, in writing:

1. Whose statements reflect the official position of the State Bar of Georgia in this matter.

2. The operative status of the April 10, 2026 dismissal.

3. The terms, scope, and completion timeline of the reconsideration.

4. Whether new or supplementing evidence may be presented, including the February 3 and February 20 submissions the Bar admits were excluded from the file.

5. Who at the Bar is responsible for informing respondent counsel and [court office name removed] of the operative status of this matter, given that the April 10 dismissal issued on a record the Bar has admitted was incomplete.

I have exhausted every internal channel this institution offers. I have written to the ADA Coordinator, the Deputy General Counsel, the Assistant General Counsel, the General Counsel, and the President. I have received contradictory answers, solo emails after repeated requests to stop, a phantom meeting invitation, and — on the day the cure window closed — silence.

If the Bar is unable or unwilling to provide a unified written response identifying its institutional position, I will have no choice but to seek assistance from organizations that exist specifically to help disabled individuals navigate institutional access failures — including disability rights advocacy organizations, ADA legal clinics, and media outlets that cover institutional accountability.

I do not want to do that. I have said from the beginning that I would rather resolve this through the processes designed for resolution. But the Bar’s conduct over the past ten days is not just unacceptable. It is baffling. And it is beginning to look less like institutional dysfunction and more like something deliberate.

I hope I am wrong about that. Proving me wrong requires one thing: a written answer to the five questions above, signed by someone authorized to speak for the institution.

The State Bar of Georgia has a President, a General Counsel, and a Board. This matter has been in front of all three since April 21, 2026. The institution’s contradictions on the record are not a staff-level problem. They are a leadership, executive, and oversight problem. That is what your offices exist to handle.

Please respond in writing.

With respect,

[Signature block.]