Judge Holly L. Teeter — A Record of Shielding State Actors
 
 Background
 
 Judge Holly L. Teeter, appointed in 2018 to the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas, holds lifetime tenure under Article III of the Constitution. While entrusted to protect federal rights, her record in three separate civil rights lawsuits filed by Tyce A. Bonjorno shows a consistent pattern: shielding Kansas state actors from accountability while refusing to address sworn evidence of paternity fraud, child abuse, falsified court orders, and systemic judicial misconduct.
 
Each lawsuit — Bonjorno v. Asher, Bonjorno v. Kansas Department for Children and Families (DCF), and Bonjorno v. Rush County Officials and Judges — was dismissed without a single exhibit or sworn affidavit being evaluated on its merits.
 
 Case 1 — 
Bonjorno v. Asher
 (Case No. 5:24-cv-4111-HLT-BGS)
 
 The Defendant
 
 Court-appointed custody investigator Audra Asher, appointed under K.S.A. § 23-3210, admitted in her own filings that she was a state actor. She held sweeping authority: interviewing children, subpoenaing records, recommending custody terms, and ordering psychological exams.
 
The Allegations
 
 The lawsuit documented:
 

• Photographs of burns and injuries on a child.

• Medical records confirming parasites and blood in stool.

• Over 1,200 parenting-app messages evidencing parental alienation.

• Police reports of abuse and assault ignored by authorities.

• Judicial notices and clerk emails confirming no adjudication of paternity exists.

• Evidence of ex parte communications between Asher and Rush County judges.

 
 Judge Teeter’s Order
 
 On August 14, 2025, Judge Teeter dismissed the case:
 

• Applied Rooker–Feldman to bar review of the Kansas Supreme Court’s writ denial.

• Applied quasi-judicial immunity to shield Asher.

• Applied Younger abstention to block jurisdiction.

• Declared Plaintiff’s filings “excessive” and “difficult to follow” rather than addressing the evidence.

 
 Result
 
 The case was dismissed without prejudice, but the effect was the same: the photographs, medical records, police reports, and sworn affidavits were never reviewed. Evidence of child abuse and paternity fraud was left unaddressed.
 
 Case 2 — 
Bonjorno v. Kansas Department for Children and Families (DCF)
 (Case No. 6:25-cv-01042-HLT-GEB)

 The Defendants
 

• Kansas DCF and Child Support Services (CSS).

• State employees responsible for enforcing custody and support orders.

 
 The Allegations
 
 The lawsuit exposed the fatal defect in Kansas’s custody and support orders:
 

• No adjudication of paternity exists in Rush County.

• No signed Voluntary Acknowledgment of Paternity (VAP).

• No DNA test or hearing ever occurred.

• Clerks confirmed in writing that no adjudication order exists.

 
 Despite this, Kansas courts and DCF:
 

• Garnished wages and intercepted tax refunds.

• Enforced void custody and support orders.

• Ignored multiple sworn Judicial Notices and Supplemental Evidence filings confirming the defect.

 
Judge Teeter’s Order
 
 On August 14, 2025, Judge Teeter dismissed the case with prejudice:
 

• Applied the domestic relations exception to claim no jurisdiction.

• Cited Rule 8, alleging Plaintiff’s pleadings were too long.

• Did not dispute or address the central, unrebutted fact that no adjudication of paternity exists.
   

Result
 
 By dismissing with prejudice, Teeter permanently blocked federal review. The enforcement of void child support and custody orders continues to this day, insulating Kansas DCF and state actors from accountability under federal civil rights law.
 
 Case 3 — 
Bonjorno v. Rush County Officials and Judges
 (Case No. 6:25-cv-01163-HLT-GEB)
 
The Defendants
 

• Judges Bruce Gatterman, John Sanders, James Fleetwood, Meryl Wilson.

• Clerks Pamela Davis and Erin Werth.

• Rush County, Kansas.

 
The Allegations
 
 This lawsuit documented systemic misconduct:
 

• Clerks impersonated judicial authority by signing orders with “It is so ordered.”

• Judges issued sanctions without hearings, denied DNA testing, and refused to adjudicate paternity.

• Exhibits proving the jurisdictional defect were concealed from the record.

• Retaliatory sanctions required thousands of dollars prepaid before hearings.

• Fabricated orders were enforced despite being void ab initio.

  
Evidence Filed
 

• A 70-page complaint supported by 130+ pages of exhibits.

• Clerk Werth’s written admission that no paternity was ever adjudicated.

• Judicial Notices detailing fraud on the court and concealment of evidence.

 
Judge Teeter’s Order
 
Before the defendants were even served, Judge Teeter sua sponte dismissed the case with prejudice:
 

• Applied absolute judicial immunity to judges — even when acting outside jurisdiction.

• Applied quasi-judicial immunity to clerks — even when impersonating judges.

• Blocked adversarial process, denying Plaintiff the right to oppose dismissal.

 
Result
 
Teeter foreclosed the case before discovery or hearings. Rush County judges and clerks were protected from accountability despite documentary proof of fraud and lack of jurisdiction.
 
Pattern Across All Three Cases
 
Judge Teeter’s rulings form a clear and documented pattern:
 

• Dismissals with prejudice, closing the door on future review.

• Immunity doctrines stretched to cover judges and clerks acting outside the law.

• Jurisdictional doctrines (Rooker–Feldman, Younger, domestic relations exception) used to avoid constitutional review.

• Refusal to weigh sworn exhibits: clerk confirmations, judicial notices, police reports, medical records, and photographs.

• State actors consistently shielded from liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

 
Conclusion — Judge Holly L. Teeter’s Record of Shielding State Actors
  
Judge Holly L. Teeter has presided over three federal civil rights lawsuits exposing paternity fraud, falsified judicial orders, ignored child abuse, and systemic misconduct in Rush County, Kansas. In each case, she dismissed the actions without reviewing the evidence, relying on doctrines of abstention and immunity.
 
Her decisions:
 
Allowed void custody and child support orders to remain enforced, despite the undisputed absence of any adjudication of paternity.
Silenced parents raising jurisdictional defects, punishing them with sanctions and blocking federal review.
Left children exposed to documented abuse and neglect, with police and medical records ignored.
​Cut off federal remedies entirely, ensuring that systemic corruption in Kansas courts remains unaccountable.

Exhibit Index — Documentary Evidence Filed in Federal Court
 
 Judicial Notices and Clerk Confirmations
 

• Exhibit A (March 30, 2020 Order): Judge Bruce Gatterman falsely claimed “temporary adjudication of paternity” existed.

• Exhibit B (June 23, 2025 Clerk Email): Rush County Clerk confirmed no adjudication of paternity exists, and no VAP was signed.

• Exhibit C (Dec. 2024 Ex Parte Motion): Alleged improper ex parte communications and judicial bias; never heard.

• Exhibit D (Clerk Confirmation): Clerk confirmed no hearing was ever scheduled on Plaintiff’s ex parte motion.

 
Child Abuse and Neglect Evidence
 

• Photographs: Burns, bruises, and injuries on children.

• Medical records: Evidence of parasites, blood in stool, and untreated neglect.

• Police reports: Documented abuse and assault, never acted upon.

• Parenting-app records: Over 1,200 messages showing parental alienation and contempt.

 
 DCF Case Evidence
 

• Judicial Notices (2025): Filed under Federal Rule of Evidence 201; confirmed no paternity adjudication exists.

• Supplemental Evidence (July 2025): Demonstrated that all enforcement actions were void ab initio.

• Clerk Admissions: Written confirmations that no DNA testing, no hearing, and no adjudication ever occurred.

 
Rush County Officials and Clerks
 

• Fabricated Orders: Clerks Davis and Werth signed “SO ORDERED” judicial orders without authority.

• Clerk Werth’s Email (July 2025): Admitted paternity was never adjudicated.

• Concealed Exhibits: Werth withheld exhibits confirming jurisdictional defects, obstructing access to records.

 
 This is not speculation — it is documented in Judge Teeter’s own dismissal orders, Rush County clerk admissions, sworn Judicial Notices, and exhibits filed in federal court.
 
The truth is simple and unavoidable: Judge Holly L. Teeter has established a record of shielding state actors from accountability, leaving constitutional violations unaddressed and ensuring that misconduct by Kansas courts and agencies remains hidden from federal oversight.

Conclusion — Judge Holly L. Teeter’s Record of Shielding State Actors
  
The record speaks for itself: Judge Holly L. Teeter of the United States District Court for the District of Kansas has dismissed three separate federal civil rights lawsuits — all supported by sworn Judicial Notices, clerk admissions, police reports, medical evidence, and photographs of abuse — without ever addressing the evidence on its merits.
 
In each case, she relied on Rooker–Feldman, Younger abstention, the domestic relations exception, and expansive claims of judicial and quasi-judicial immunity to shut down review. By doing so, Judge Teeter:
 

• Shielded Kansas DCF and Child Support Services from accountability for enforcing void custody and child support orders where no adjudication of paternity exists.

• Protected Rush County judges and clerks who fabricated and signed judicial orders, imposed sanctions without hearings, and concealed exhibits proving jurisdictional defects.

• Insulated court-appointed custody investigator Audra Asher, who ignored police reports, medical neglect, and documented child abuse while engaging in ex parte communications with state judges.

 
The consequences of her rulings are profound and ongoing:
 

• Void orders remain enforced, even though the Rush County Clerk confirmed no adjudication of paternity and no Voluntary Acknowledgment of Paternity exists.

• Parents are denied due process and punished with sanctions for raising jurisdictional defects that state officials themselves admitted.

• Children remain unprotected from abuse and neglect, despite police reports, medical documentation, and photographs filed as exhibits.

• Federal oversight has been cut off, allowing Kansas courts and agencies to continue systemic misconduct unchecked.

 
This is not opinion — it is documented fact in Judge Teeter’s own dismissal orders, the official admissions of Kansas court clerks, and the sworn evidence filed in federal court.
 
Judge Holly L. Teeter has established a verifiable record of shielding state actors from accountability, silencing constitutional claims, and leaving families and children in Kansas exposed to systemic abuse, fraud, and judicial misconduct.