P1
ADA Accommodation Refusal · 9 January 2026
Formal remote-appearance request for documented PTSD / severe anxiety / agoraphobia / executive dysfunction was not ruled on; breakdown on record; minutes say only “break.”
Fact spine
2026-01-09 · Plaintiff (pro se)
Requested ADA remote appearance for PTSD, severe anxiety, agoraphobia, executive dysfunction; warned of high risk of anxiety attack if forced to appear in person.
Written/oral accommodation request in case file · Weight: hard
2026-01-09 · Court
Did not rule on accommodation; hearing proceeded; visible anxiety crisis requiring a break; minutes record only unexplained “break.”
Hearing video + court minutes · Weight: hard
2026-01-09+ · Plaintiff
Post-hearing disability worsening; agoraphobia / housebound period (~2 months); continued unaddressed ADA needs.
Medical notes / contemporaneous journal · Weight: testimony
Export draft
On or about January 9, 2026, Plaintiff formally requested a reasonable ADA accommodation (remote appearance via Zoom/WebEx) based on documented disabilities including PTSD, severe anxiety, agoraphobia, and executive dysfunction. The Court did not rule on the request. During the hearing Plaintiff experienced a visible anxiety crisis requiring a break. Court minutes record only an unexplained “break” and do not document the accommodation request or the episode. This denial of interactive process and failure to accommodate violated Title II principles and materially impaired Plaintiff’s ability to participate.
Attach
- Written ADA request (if any)
- Hearing video clip of breakdown
- Minutes showing only “break”
- Medical/therapy letters listing diagnoses (if available)
- Later ADA motion package for future hearings
Never say
- Any Hypercodex or surveillance theory
- That the court is “part of a network”
- Psychiatric labels you cannot source
Rebuttal: If opposed as “he still participated”: the breakdown itself is the evidence of impairment; the minutes’ silence is the evidence of process failure.