Source-linked Georgia ADA records
The ADA Says People with Disabilities Have Rights. Getting Them in Georgia Is Another Story.
This is the documented story of what happened when a disabled dad dealing with Georgia institutions asked the State Bar of Georgia, GIRMA, Gallagher Bassett, and the City of Brookhaven for an accessible and accountable process.
The 30-second version
Two submissions were received. A dismissal said no rebuttal had arrived.
The State Bar dismissed a grievance on April 10, 2026, stating that no rebuttal had been received. System receipts existed for two submissions. On April 21, Assistant General Counsel Leigh Burgess acknowledged that both had been received and misclassified rather than added to the file before dismissal.
The record was not corrected. Questions about access, file placement, review procedures, and conflicts remained unanswered. On June 30, the Bar closed six of my seven open matters in one day. The seventh, my complaint to its Human Resources office, has no answer as of September 5, 2026.
The dismissal still says no rebuttal was received. I sent two.
Meet the disabled dad behind the record and read the longer personal introduction.
Choose how to read the record
What Happened
Read the evidence-backed story in chronological order.
AccountabilityOpen Questions
See the process and access questions that remained unanswered.
ReceiptsSource Documents
Read the emails, letters, dates, senders, recipients, and transcripts.
Institutions and records
The missing rebuttals and moving thresholds
Leigh Burgess, William D. NeSmith III, John J. Shiptenko, Adrienne D. Nash, Jeffrey W. DeLoach, and the June 30 decisions.
GIRMA, GMA, and Gallagher BassettThe claim-handling record
Belinda Boscoe, James R. Westbury Jr., unanswered questions, and the written record.
City of Brookhaven and BPDThe five minute call and the $49,385 records bill
Christian Sigman, the open records estimates, the twenty minute closures, and a police department that answers the public in 1.3 days.
Why access became the issue
Georgia ADA Access Became the Last Resort, Not the First Demand
I did not begin by invoking the ADA. I began with ordinary requests, the kind anyone can make: acknowledge what arrived, put documents in the correct file, answer in writing, identify one responsible contact, and explain what process applied.
I offered proof of my disability before anyone asked. What I needed was modest: written correspondence compatible with the adaptive technology I use, a dependable route for submitting documents, and confirmation that a real person had placed them where they belonged. Nothing about those requests guaranteed an outcome or gave me an advantage.
I invoked disability access only after the ordinary channels failed. That distinction matters. The ADA was not a weapon I brought to the dispute. It was the route I reached for when the institutions’ own systems made continued participation unnecessarily difficult.
The State Bar of Georgia questioned whether assistance was needed because my writing appeared detailed and articulate. But the clear sentences they were reading had been dictated through the same assistive technology that made written participation possible. When disability itself could no longer be questioned, the written responses began questioning why I wanted access.
State Bar and GIRMA responses in their own words
“Your invocation of the ADA process may be directed less toward obtaining accommodation for a functional limitation and more toward securing a particular substantive outcome … or toward establishing a basis for further legal action against the State Bar.”
William D. NeSmith III, Deputy General Counsel, State Bar of Georgia, May 12, 2026 Read the source email
“Your efforts seem to be less intended to vindicate any bona fide legal right than to exploit laws unrelated to the merits of the claim for the purpose of annoyance.”
James R. Westbury Jr., outside counsel for GMA and GIRMA, May 1, 2026 See James R. Westbury Jr. in the record
A law since 1990
The ADA Outlived Atlanta Stadiums. Access Was Still Treated as the Problem.
The Americans with Disabilities Act became federal law in 1990. Spaghetti Junction had just opened. The Braves and Falcons still played at the old Fulton County Stadium. Atlanta had not yet been awarded the Olympics. Mobile phones looked like bricks. Google did not exist. Germany was still two countries.
That is how long public institutions have had to learn one basic principle: disability access is a federal right, not whatever level of access an institution feels like providing. I asked Georgia institutions to honor a law that outlived their stadiums. Instead of fixing the documented process failures, their written responses increasingly focused on the person asking.
I asked for equal access. The record shows accusations, delay, unanswered questions, changing explanations, and acknowledged mistakes that remained uncorrected. So I stopped asking the institutions to describe what happened and started preserving what they had already written.
Every email. Every date. Every receipt. You do not have to accept my characterization of the record. You can read the source documents, follow the dated timeline, and decide what their words show.
Why the record can be checked
- Material claims link to the document that supports them.
- Official names are used only in connection with documented official conduct.
- Allegations, court findings, and institutional denials are identified separately.
- Protected names, sealed material, personal identifiers, and a minor are not published.
- Corrections are invited and documented.
The record also examines Black attorney Marsha Mignott’s disciplinary case as a comparator, while clearly separating her allegations from adjudicated facts. Read the full account.
Frequently asked questions
What is ADA Matters?
A documentary clearinghouse recording what happened when a disabled dad asked three Georgia institutions for an accessible and accountable process. It is not a blog, a news site, a legal site, or a revenge project.
Who runs this site?
One disabled person, writing with voice software because of substantial bilateral hand dysfunction. Every letter in the record was produced that way.
Is anything on this site legal advice?
No. The author is not a lawyer and nothing here is legal advice.
Have the institutions disputed anything on this site?
Every institution named here has been invited to identify any inaccuracy on its page. As of September 5, 2026, none has identified any.
Which institutions does this site cover?
The State Bar of Georgia, the City of Brookhaven including its Police Department, and GIRMA with the Georgia Municipal Association and Gallagher Bassett. The State of Georgia ADA Coordinator’s Office appears as the office that engaged.