A local woman has accused a county court and its chief judge of denying her access to court services by refusing to provide reasonable accommodations for her disabilities during ongoing divorce proceedings. The complaint, which raises concerns about due process and disability rights, was filed by Neva Muhlenberg on March 18, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against Chief Judge Alan Gregory Poole of the Cobb County Superior Court.
According to the filing, Muhlenberg describes herself as a qualified disabled person with cognitive disabilities who has been a cancer patient since June 2016. She alleges that despite repeated requests for reasonable accommodations—such as stays or continuances to allow her to receive medical treatment—the court systematically refused these requests. Muhlenberg claims this refusal led to significant penalties against her, including a $70,000 sanction for her inability to participate fully in civil divorce proceedings before Judge Poole due to health complications from chemotherapy and related conditions.
The complaint outlines several incidents where Muhlenberg asserts she was denied necessary support. For example, she states that on June 20, 2024, while experiencing life-threatening low blood sugar during a hearing, Judge Poole instructed court staff not to assist her or call emergency services. Muhlenberg says she was forced to call 911 herself from the courthouse lobby and was subsequently sanctioned by Judge Poole for leaving the hearing room: “Judge Poole sanctioned Plaitnff for taking steps to save her life due to her uncontrollable diabetes.” She further alleges that similar requests for accommodation were ignored or denied over an eight-year period spanning multiple stages of litigation.
Muhlenberg’s filing details claims under both federal and state law. She cites violations of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), specifically 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-12134 and its implementing regulations at 28 C.F.R Part 35. She also references alleged violations of Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and comparable provisions in the Georgia Constitution. The plaintiff argues that these actions deprived her of due process and equal protection by preventing meaningful participation in court programs and services: “The Court has systematically refused to acknowledge shes disabled denied her access to the courts services programs and activities and punished her with systematic sanctions because of her disabilities.”
The complaint names several other individuals associated with Cobb County government as involved in denying accommodations or participating in decisions affecting Muhlenberg’s case. These include staff attorneys, administrative assistants, deputy sheriffs, clerks, administrators for the superior court, and attorneys employed by Cobb County.
Muhlenberg provides a chronology of events supporting her claims. She asserts that after being diagnosed with cancer in June 2016—and following domestic violence incidents involving her then-husband—she required multiple surgeries and aggressive treatments that resulted in permanent physical impairments as well as cognitive decline. Despite submitting medical affidavits from oncologists and psychiatrists attesting to these conditions into the court record between 2016 and 2024, she alleges Judge Poole refused to admit them as evidence or consider them when ruling on motions related to trial scheduling or participation.
The plaintiff further contends that Judge Poole made extra-judicial findings regarding her disability status without notifying her or entering such rulings into the official record: “Judge Poole rejected Ms Muhlenberg’s claim her cancer is a pernmenant disability…” According to emails cited in the complaint from opposing counsel dated November 14, 2017, this information was shared with others but not disclosed directly to Muhlenberg until much later.
Sanctions imposed against Muhlenberg—including striking pleadings related to enforcement of a prenuptial agreement’s disability clause—are described as retaliation for requesting accommodations: “On July 4 2024 Judge Poole admitted he sanctione d Plaitnff on 5-4-2018 ‘because’ she had filed 3 motions to continue or stay the proceedings before 5-4-2018.” The complaint also highlights instances where other litigants received different treatment; for example, another party’s request for continuance due to immunocompromised status was granted without requiring supporting medical documentation.
As immediate harm resulting from these actions, Muhlenberg states that her house is scheduled for sale on March 19, 2026—a step taken by Dale Muhlenberg (her former spouse) allegedly based on attorney fee awards obtained through what she characterizes as fraudulent statements regarding his employment status with federal authorities.
In terms of relief sought from the federal district court, Muhlenberg requests declaratory judgments recognizing violations of federal rights under ADA provisions as well as injunctive relief preventing further denial of reasonable accommodations by Cobb County Superior Court officials. She asks that all sanctions arising from alleged failures related to disability be set aside and seeks remedies ensuring future compliance with disability laws within county judicial processes.
The case is identified as Case No. 1:26-cv-01481-MLB. No attorney representation is listed for either party within this portion of the filing; Neva Muhlenberg brings this action pro se.
Source: 126cv01481_Neva_Muhlenberg_v_The_Honorable_Senior_Complaint_Northern_District_of_Georgia.pdf
