I Asked Georgia Bar HR Director Sandra Dixon What Happened to My June 8 Complaint

From: the complainant
Subject: Day 88. Where Did My June 8 Complaint Go?
Attachments: 3 PDFs: the courts’ ADA Grievance Procedure dated January 2026, William D. NeSmith III‘s May 12, 2026 letter, and the June 8 complaint.

Ms. Dixon,

I am writing to Human Resources because the Office of the General Counsel is the subject of my complaint.

Some background: I am a member of the public who used the State Bar’s grievance system, and I am disabled. I have limited use of my dominant hand, chronic pain, and cognitive limitations, and I use assistive technology and voice to text to write. Beginning in the spring of 2026 I asked the State Bar for two things. First, accommodations so I could take part in its process. Second, the name of the procedure a disabled person uses to complain about disability discrimination in that process.

I got the first. I have never gotten the second. The Bar granted accommodations, approved another one nine days later, and in between told me it is not a public entity and owes no published ADA Coordinator. Two weeks after that it told me Title II does not apply to it at all. Nobody answered the question I had actually asked, which was where to file.

I am attaching Mr. NeSmith’s May 12, 2026 letter because it states the position that makes this inquiry unavoidable. I have not written to him about this and I have not put him on this email. His conduct is part of what my June 8 complaint asked you to review.

In that letter he wrote:

“Although the State Bar serves as an administrative arm of the Supreme Court of Georgia pursuant to the Court’s authority over the regulation of the legal profession, it nevertheless remains a private, member-funded, and member-governed organization. The State Bar of Georgia is not a department or agency of the State of Georgia, therefore we are not required to have a published ADA Coordinator.”

I am not writing to argue that position with Human Resources. I asked where a disabled person files. I was answered with an argument about whether the law applies. Those are not the same thing, and the second one is not an answer to the first.

On June 8, 2026, at 5:05 PM, I sent you a written complaint. You were the addressee. The Bar’s own mail server confirmed delivery. Eleven members of leadership were copied. The Chief Operating Officer opened it 35 minutes later. I wrote again on June 10. Two senior officials opened that one the same day. That complaint is quoted below this message and attached again so it is in front of you.

That complaint asked Human Resources to open a matter, keep it away from the lawyers whose conduct I reported, identify any office it was referred to, confirm conflict screening and preservation, and tell me who had accepted responsibility.

Today is September 4. Day 88. Human Resources has not acknowledged the complaint, given it a number, named a reviewer, confirmed a conflict screen, confirmed preservation, identified a referral, described any internal review, or told me where it went. Not one word.

I will account for my own silence, because it is fair to ask. I have had serious medical problems since June, including surgery and hospital stays, and I have not been able to keep up correspondence. That is why this letter comes in September instead of July. It does not change anything that was already in your hands on June 8.

I have one question, and I am asking it before anything else.

Did State Bar Human Resources forward my June 8 complaint, or any of my ADA complaints, to Human Resources at the Judicial Council of Georgia and Administrative Office of the Courts, handle them inside State Bar Human Resources, refer them somewhere else, or do nothing with them?

One of these four is accurate. Tell me which.

1. Forwarded to JC/AOC Human Resources.
2. Referred to some other office or person.
3. Kept and handled inside State Bar Human Resources.
4. Nothing was done.

If none of the four is accurate, describe what did happen.

Here is why.

The Judicial Council of Georgia and Administrative Office of the Courts publish a written ADA Grievance Procedure, dated January 2026. It says it may be used by anyone alleging disability discrimination in that office’s services, activities, programs, or benefits. It directs complaints to Human Resources at the Judicial Council and Administrative Office of the Courts. It sets a 60 calendar day submission period, a meeting within 15 calendar days of receipt, a written response within 15 calendar days after the meeting, an appeal to the JC/AOC General Counsel, and retention of the records for three years. A copy is attached.

I am not claiming that procedure covers the State Bar. Its own text is about the programs of the Judicial Council and Administrative Office of the Courts, and whether it reaches an attorney grievance is a fair question. What I am asking is whether anyone at the State Bar ever considered it, asked JC/AOC about its scope, forwarded my complaint so JC/AOC could answer that question, or pointed me to any other judicial branch route. If Human Resources decided it did not apply, I need the name of the person who decided that, the date, and what route Human Resources thought did apply.

The possibility was not remote. The Bar’s own website says the Office of the General Counsel serves as the Court’s administrative arm in attorney discipline. The Supreme Court of Georgia’s order of February 26, 2026 provides that the President of the State Bar of Georgia, or the President’s designee, sits on the Judicial Council. The Judicial Council roster dated May 1, 2026 lists Christopher Twyman in that seat. Mr. Twyman was copied on my June 8 complaint. So was Mr. Gentry, who became President on June 13 and holds the seat now. The order and the roster are published by the Judicial Council and I will send copies on request.

I delivered a written complaint to the State Bar’s Director of Human Resources. The branch the Bar says it serves had a published disability grievance procedure that runs through Human Resources. The Bar’s own President sat on the body whose administrative office published it. Nobody told me the procedure existed.

The dates mattered. When my complaint reached you on June 8, the acts it described from May 12, May 15, May 19, and May 29 were all still inside a 60 calendar day window. If the procedure applied, there was time to put them in front of JC/AOC Human Resources. If it did not apply, there was time to tell me so and name the route that did. If Human Resources meant to handle it internally, there was time to say a matter had been opened. I got none of the three. On the May 29 act, that window closed on July 28. I am asking whether the silence of Human Resources ran out a deadline I was never told about.

None of this was new to the Bar by June 8. On April 30 Mr. Shiptenko identified himself as the ADA Coordinator for my matter. On May 4 he granted written communication and accessible format accommodations. On May 6 the State ADA Coordinator’s Office told me in writing that Mr. Shiptenko “can share with you the proper procedure to file an ADA-related grievance.” On May 7 Mr. Shiptenko wrote that “the ADA only requires public entities with 50 or more employees to designate at least one responsible employee to coordinate compliance,” that “I am one of the designated ADA Coordinators,” and that he was “analyzing our ADA notices and processes to determine whether and how they can be improved” after speaking with the State ADA Coordinator. On May 12 Mr. NeSmith wrote the letter attached to this message. On May 13 the Bar approved an accommodation again. On May 15, the morning of my scheduled hand surgery, Mr. NeSmith closed substantive correspondence with me. On May 19 an unsigned message from the Response mailbox told me status and procedure requests would not be processed. On May 26 Mr. Shiptenko acknowledged my concern about the difference between the Bar’s Spanish and English grievance forms. On May 29 he wrote that the Bar’s position “remains that it is not subject to Title II.” Four of my original access requests were never answered at all: the published ADA procedure, the designated ADA route, a written route requiring neither CAPTCHA nor telephone, and the name behind the unsigned May 19 message. Then I went over the Office of the General Counsel to you.

Across every email, letter, and dismissal the State Bar has sent me, the words Judicial Council and Administrative Office of the Courts appear zero times.

The institution claims the judicial branch when it explains what it is. It has never used that relationship to give me a door.

When I asked what the State Bar is, I was told it is an administrative arm of the Supreme Court of Georgia. When I asked where a disabled person files a disability complaint, I was told the Bar is private and owes nothing. Both answers came from the Office of the General Counsel. Whichever one is true, neither was ever followed by an address.

An organization can have its own ADA grievance procedure. It can route disability complaints to the judicial branch procedure. What it cannot do is take a disability complaint from a disabled member of the public, hold it for 88 days, and have neither.

Eleven people were copied on my June 8 complaint. Ten of them are lawyers. Two have served as President of the State Bar of Georgia, an office that holds a seat on the Judicial Council. The judicial branch ADA grievance procedure attached to this email was published in January 2026 and has been available online the entire time. Nobody mentioned it. Nobody mentioned anything.

The State Bar told me it is an administrative arm of the Supreme Court of Georgia. The State Bar never told me the courts have an ADA grievance procedure.

Did anyone at the State Bar know that procedure existed? If so, who, and when? If not, tell me what anyone did to find out.

Everyone copied here now knows it exists, because it is attached. What happens after today is a separate question from what happened before.

One more thing, and it has been outstanding longer than the complaint. I have asked the State Bar for its insurance information six times. On May 7 to the Office of the General Counsel. On May 12 twice in one evening: once in the forward to Mr. Twyman at both of his addresses, and again an hour later in my response to Mr. NeSmith, both copied to the General Counsel, two Deputy General Counsel, an Assistant General Counsel, the ADA Coordinator, Grievance Counsel, and the State ADA Coordinator’s Office. Carrier identity, errors and omissions coverage, whether the carrier had been notified, any reservation of rights correspondence, and preservation. On May 13 it was listed again as operative and unanswered. On May 29. On June 1. On June 17, to you and to every person copied on this email.

On May 15 Mr. NeSmith answered. He wrote that because I had “demanded information regarding insurance and liability coverage,” the State Bar “will not engage in further substantive correspondence” with me outside formal legal process. He did not refuse the request. He treated the request as the reason to stop answering me. That was the morning of my hand surgery, 112 days ago. Nobody has answered it since.

I am asking a seventh time, in writing, to Human Resources. Provide the carrier, the policy number, the coverage limits, whether the carrier has been notified of my complaints, any reservation of rights correspondence, and the name and contact information of the person or office that handles claims against the State Bar. If it is not provided by the date below, I will make a formal written demand for it, and that demand will state what it took to get a disabled person a set of facts that any organization can produce in an afternoon.

Please answer the following in writing.

1. Which of the four descriptions above is accurate.

2. If anything was forwarded or referred anywhere, what was sent, on what date, by whom, to whom, how, any tracking number, and any acknowledgment that came back.

3. If Human Resources opened a file, the date it was opened, its number, the office responsible, the reviewer, and whether it is still open.

4. If Human Resources neither referred it nor opened a file, say so.

5. Who in Human Resources first received the June 8 complaint, and where it went inside the Bar, by person, office, and date.

6. Whether Human Resources talked to anyone about it, and when. Specifically the General Counsel, any Deputy or Assistant General Counsel, Mr. Shiptenko, the Executive Director, the Chief Operating Officer, the President or the immediate past President, outside counsel, or anyone at the Judicial Council, the Administrative Office of the Courts, the Supreme Court, or the State ADA Coordinator’s Office.

7. Whether anyone at the State Bar considered the JC/AOC ADA Grievance Procedure as a route for my complaints. If someone decided it did not apply, who, when, and whether that decision was written down. Same question as to Mr. Twyman and Mr. Gentry in their capacity as the Bar’s member of the Judicial Council.

8. The written State Bar policy that governs a complaint by a member of the public against State Bar employees. If there is no written policy, say that.

9. The ADA grievance procedure that was available to me on June 8. Not the Judicial Council’s. The State Bar’s own. Name it, date it, and tell me where it is published. If the State Bar had no ADA grievance procedure and no designated route for a disabled member of the public on that date, write that sentence.

I am not asking for legal advice or for anything anyone said to a lawyer. I am asking what the office did: who got it, where it went, who was told, what was opened or referred, and who took responsibility.

My June 8 complaint was not the end of your notice. I supplemented it on June 10. On June 16, I sent a submission containing 24 questions to Mr. Shiptenko and copied Human Resources and Bar leadership. On June 17 I sent 17 outstanding ADA questions. On June 26 you were copied on my email concerning 42 days of silence. Human Resources never wrote back on any of them. This is not one email that got missed. It is three months of notice with nothing on the other side of it.

The preservation demand in my June 8 complaint stands. Please hold everything about how that complaint was received, routed, assigned, referred, reviewed, or closed; all Human Resources communications about me or my complaints, inside the Bar and outside it, including with the Judicial Council, the Administrative Office of the Courts, the Supreme Court, the State ADA Coordinator’s Office, and with Mr. Twyman and Mr. Gentry; the mail system records showing receipt, forwarding, and attachment access; and any policy governing complaints against State Bar employees. Please confirm preservation in writing.

I raised these access problems with the State Bar four months ago. Nothing has changed. I checked the Bar’s website today. The Ethics and Discipline page, the Disciplinary Process page, the homepage, the About the Bar page, and the Contact Us page do not contain the word ADA. They do not contain the word disability. They do not contain the word accessibility. The Ethics and Discipline page still says the Office of the General Counsel serves as the Court’s administrative arm. The Contact Us page tells a member of the public to call the main number. A disabled person looking for the way in today finds exactly what I found in April, which is nothing.

I am not the only one. Other people have contacted me about similar experiences with the State Bar’s process. I am not going to describe their matters and I am not speaking for them.

I am recommending, in writing, that the State Bar obtain an independent review of its ADA notice, its designated contact, its published procedure, and how disability complaints are routed. Not a review by the Office of the General Counsel, whose conduct is the subject of my complaint. An outside one. If the answers to the questions above are good answers, a review will confirm it. If they are not, the State Bar should want to know that before someone else asks.

Please respond in accessible electronic format by Friday, September 18, 2026, at 5:00 PM Eastern.

I wrote the June 8 complaint between two hospital stays. I am writing this one on the day of another procedure. I am not asking Human Resources for an investigation report. I am asking where my complaint went.

I found the courts’ ADA grievance procedure myself. Eleven people at the State Bar had my complaint in front of them for 88 days, ten of them lawyers, two of them past or present President of an organization that holds a seat on the Judicial Council. Not one of them found it for me.

Respectfully,

██████ ███████

Qualified individual with a disability; SSA-determined disabled and receiving SSDI; documented upper-extremity and cognitive limitations. Supporting documentation is available upon written request and execution of a properly limited HIPAA-compliant authorization.

Accessibility notice: Due to my documented disability, including limited or no functional use of my dominant hand, I use assistive technology and voice-to-text tools to produce written communications. I sincerely appreciate your understanding of this accommodation. If any portion contains a typographical error or is unclear as a result, please do not hesitate to ask and I will gladly clarify.