All information on this site is sourced from public records, published court opinions, and publicly available review platforms.

Dr. Rodney E. McNeal, PhD

Custody Evaluator — Vordis Behavioral Health LLC — Kansas City Metro

2.7 / 5
Google Maps — 11 reviews
2.3 / 5
Healthgrades — 12 reviews
1.8 / 5
RateMDs
1.5 / 5
Rate My Professors (KU)

Ratings as of March 2026. Visit each platform for current ratings.

Public Reviews

The following reviews are reproduced verbatim from publicly accessible healthcare and education review platforms. No reviews have been altered, edited, or fabricated.

Google Maps Reviews — "Vordis Group" (2.7/5, 11 reviews)

★ 1/5 Matthew Adams — ~5 months ago
"The man claimed i pushed my mother down the stairs as a child and that i attacked my stepmother. Stated those things as facts to the court, my mother and stepmother had to file sworn affidavits with the court and those were provided to the Kansas Behavioral Sciences Regulatory Board, after they determined that he was not in violation of ethics rules be releasing false information. I've attempted to follow-up to confirm if any action will be taken in light of what even the judge called 'demonstrably false' information in his reports to the court. I sued him as a result and we was given immunity as essentially an agent of the court. He separately tried to bill me and send over 50,000$ to a collections agency, seemingly in retaliation, but his legal counsel has since confirmed in writing he is no longer pursuing collection of those amounts. Just posting this as a service to others who may be ordered to work with him by the courts. The system is broken, but individuals like Dr. McNeal are the reason why."
Google Maps — Reviewer is plaintiff in Adams v. McNeal et al., Case No. 24CV05383 (dismissed on summary judgment in McNeal's favor, May 28, 2025)
★ 1/5 Kristin — Local Guide (44 reviews) — ~2 months ago
"Refused to abide by a signed subpoena by the Court. Then tried to falsely claim I was harassing him. He has gotten in trouble before for having inappropriate communication with opposing counsel. He told me he wasn't interviewing any collaterials which I later found out he did interview collaterals and only biased collaterals. Interviewing only biased collaterals means the psych evaluation is incomplete information. I will be reporting him to the board."
Google Maps — 2 likes
★ 1/5 Jake Knopke — Edited, ~3 years ago
"The other negative reviews are spot on. There is a common thread here. Rodney is simply used as a weapon. He is an extension of manipulation and corruption (collusion with attorneys) in a contentious divorce. And he seems to embrace that role.

So, I can not recommend Dr McNeals services. He is, no doubt, a well educated man. He will be the first to tell you that. He's quite arrogant about it, in fact. It seems to give him some sort of power or authority in his mind. For example, he literally introduced himself to me as a 'benevolent dictator.' It's quite obvious he just views himself as a dictator. But he's smart enough to throw benevolent in there for the sake of optics. He's quite immature if he feels that his self perceived superior intelligence is being challenged. So if you are a beta type personality, and will accept anything he says without question, he very well could be a good fit for you.

I would also warn, again, as others have on slightly different terms, there seems to be an inability to view people as individuals and take each situation as unique on his end. He made many and repeated, sweeping generalizations about me based on, what I assume to be, his experience with others. Or his gatherings from biased 3rd parties. This clouded his entire view and rendered any opinion of his, obsolete. I personally believe it's his ego that is standing in his way of achieving any semblance of benevolence. And until his ego is corralled I see no value from him as a professional in the field of psychology. And God help us all if he ever obtains that desired status as a dictator."
Google Maps — 9 likes
★ 1/5 Heidi A — ~8 years ago
"I wish that I could write a positive review of Dr. McNeal. Unfortunately, I left his presence feeling EXTREMELY angry and frustrated.(Which he knew and made absolutely no attempt to end on a 'good note'.) He seems to have a lot of education. And even a student award in honor of his parents at KU, but he was ineffective at best. I felt he was narcissistic and more concerned with his patients knowing just how much HE knew than actually HELPING with patient issues. I cannot in good conscience recommend his 'services.' I am getting frustrated now just thinking about him. There are a lot of therapists out there. I have been to quite a few - some good. Some not so good. I have never had anyone come remotely close to the negative experience I had with Dr. McNeal. I would wholeheartedly recommend avoiding him. Find someone else."
Google Maps — 14 likes

Healthgrades Reviews

★ 1/5 September 25, 2025
"He was referred by a retaliating GAL and opposing counsel for seeking a trial because I was exposing child abuse and to try to silence me they knew exactly which psychologist would follow their orders and issue a Level III evaluation to terminate my parental rights and if insane asylums were around, this doctor would be the one signing my papers without ever meeting me. So what I did instead? Take him to federal court."
Healthgrades
★ 1/5 September 18, 2024
"I would avoid Dr. McNeal and if he is suggested by an attorney (other than your own) I would highly suggest arguing for someone else. My experience with Dr. McNeal has been terrible. Dr. McNeal was basically used as a hired mouthpiece to support opposing counsel. He only interviewed 'collaterals' that he had every reason to believe would provide biased, if not outright false information about me. This included interviewing my husband's mistress, who by her very nature, obviously lacks all decency and integrity. He went on to make far reaching comments on my religious beliefs, suggesting they were not truly held but rather a means of punishing my soon-to-be ex-husband for his infidelity. Dr. McNeal had repeated contact with opposing counsel after the evaluation was underway. My understanding is that this is not procedurally correct and borders on unethical. He had a smug and condescending tone throughout my clinical interview. Finally, his recommendations far exceeded the scope."
Healthgrades
★ 1/5 November 7, 2022
"Do not use Rodney if you are going through a divorce. He will try to insert himself into court proceedings even if you hired him privately. He literally seemed to derive immense pleasure from inflicting chaos. He calling my soon-to-be exs attorney he had no permission to talk to and told her things we discussed in therapy. Rodney made a difficult divorce much harder, and he honestly was so smug and satisfied with himself the entire time he was doing it."
Healthgrades

RateMDs Reviews

★ 1/5 RateMDs — 1.8/5 overall
"Do not use Rodney if you are going through a divorce. He will try to insert himself into court proceedings even if you hired him privately... He calling my soon-to-be ex's attorney he had no permission to talk to and told her things we discussed in therapy."

Rate My Professors — University of Kansas

★ 1.5/5 Rate My Professors — PSYC 333
"Rude, patronizing, uninformed, and disrespectful."

Difficulty: 4.6/5 — 7 ratings (2015-2016)

Recurring Themes Across Platforms

The following themes appear independently across multiple reviewers on different platforms. Each item is sourced from the reviews reproduced above.

Selective collateral interviews — Multiple reviewers across platforms report that Dr. McNeal interviewed only collaterals adverse to one party, rather than a balanced selection.

Contact with opposing counsel — Several reviewers independently describe Dr. McNeal having contact with opposing counsel during or after the evaluation process.

Disputed billing practices — One reviewer reports a $50,000+ collections attempt that was subsequently withdrawn (per Matthew Adams, Google Maps review).

Scope of recommendations — Reviewers describe Dr. McNeal making recommendations or taking actions beyond the stated scope of his evaluation role.

Self-described "benevolent dictator" — One reviewer reports that Dr. McNeal introduced himself with this phrase.

Court finding of inaccurate information — Per the Adams Google Maps review, a judge characterized information in Dr. McNeal's court reports as "demonstrably false." The Kansas BSRB reportedly found no ethics violation. Note: Adams's civil lawsuit (Case No. 24CV05383) was subsequently dismissed on summary judgment in McNeal's favor on May 28, 2025; the Google review remains public.

Note: Reviews are reproduced verbatim from their original public sources. Visit Google Maps, Healthgrades, RateMDs, or Rate My Professors for the complete profiles. Google search may not surface the Vordis Group business listing — reviews are accessible through Google Maps directly.

Public Court Records

The following cases are matters of public record. Their inclusion here does not constitute an assertion that allegations have been proven unless noted as a published court opinion.

Pickett v. Bostwick — Published Appellate Opinion
667 S.W.3d 653 (Mo. App. W.D. 2023) • Case No. WD85528
Court of Appeals of Missouri, Western District • Published May 16, 2023
Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri

Pickett v. Bostwick is offered here as factual evidence that formal allegations of the same character have been made against Dr. McNeal in another Jackson County custody proceeding — not as legal authority on Dr. McNeal's methodology. McNeal is referenced in the opinion but is not a party to the appeal. The Western District dismissed the appeal on Rule 84.04 procedural grounds and did not reach the substantive merits of the allegations. Nothing in the Pickett opinion constitutes a judicial finding for or against Dr. McNeal.

What the opinion does recite about the underlying trial-court proceedings:

  • In February 2022, the Guardian Ad Litem received Dr. McNeal's evaluation and moved for an ex parte temporary restraining order, which the trial court granted.
  • The June 30, 2022 trial-court judgment awarded Pickett sole physical and legal custody, ordered Bostwick to supervised visitation, and assessed $10,000 in attorney fees against Bostwick.
  • The father alleged that Dr. McNeal's evaluation was “based on lies told to the evaluator to obtain a specific result” and raised points on appeal including evaluator bias, exclusion of expert witness testimony, ex parte communication, and trial-court bias.
  • The father further alleged the Guardian Ad Litem and therapy provider had “financial ties to Petitioner's counsel.”

Because the Western District resolved the appeal on procedural grounds under Rule 84.04, none of these allegations were adjudicated. They are presented here only as documentary evidence that allegations of the same character have appeared in another published Jackson County matter.

Adams v. McNeal et al.
Case No. 24CV05383 • Johnson County District Court, Kansas (2024)

Civil lawsuit filed against Dr. McNeal and other custody professionals. Dismissed on summary judgment in McNeal's favor on May 28, 2025. The plaintiff's public Google review — reproduced above — documents a judicial characterization of "demonstrably false" information in McNeal's reports, sworn affidavits contradicting McNeal's claims, and a $50,000+ collections attempt subsequently withdrawn. A related federal proceeding involves a mother ordered to have no contact with her five children.

In re Marriage of Page (Howard-Page v. Page) — Kansas Court of Appeals
Unpublished Memorandum Opinion • Filed December 2, 2016
Johnson County District Court • Judge Neil B. Foth

The court's opinion states: "the district court ordered [Marni Howard-Page] to undergo a full psychological evaluation with Dr. Rodney McNeal on January 3, 2014." Dr. McNeal testified that Marni "suffered from borderline personality disorder."

"As a result of this testimony, the district court ordered Marni to undergo treatment and counseling at the Lilac Center."

Marni lost primary residential custody, was placed on supervised visitation only, and ultimately fell $16,457 behind in child support.

Lawson v. Bolton et al.
Case No. 2:25-cv-02251 • U.S. District Court, District of Kansas (2025)

Active federal civil rights action naming Dr. McNeal as one of ten defendants, alongside a Guardian Ad Litem (Andrew Bolton / Bolton Law Firm LLC) and a court-involved therapist (Dan Livingston / Livingston Center LLC). The plaintiff is pro se.

Business Entity History

Public records from the National Provider Identifier (NPI) Registry, Kansas Secretary of State, and healthcare directories.

Entity Type Address Status
Border Group Services, Inc KS Corp 8014 State Line Rd, Ste 100, Prairie Village, KS Defunct
Vordis Group Inc KS Corp 8014 State Line Rd, Ste 100, Prairie Village, KS Active
Vordis Behavioral Health LLC KS LLC 7300 W 110th St, Ste 715, Overland Park, KS
(Regus/Davinci virtual office building)
Active
NPI Records
Individual: 1295836427 (assigned Sept 2006) — "Sole Proprietor: No"
Vordis Group Inc: 1568759686 (assigned July 2011)
Vordis Behavioral Health LLC: 1811455561 (assigned March 2019)
Current Address
7300 West 110th Street, Suite 715, Overland Park, KS 66210
Commerce Plaza I, Overland Park, KS — a professional office suite operated by Regus/Davinci Virtual.
Per Google Maps listing and Davinci Virtual Office directory.
Website Claim
vordisgroup.com states: "a team of highly trained professionals"
No team members are identified by name anywhere on the website. NPI registry lists the group affiliation as "Vordis Behavioral Health (2 members)."

Documented Referral Pattern

Public court records document a pattern of referrals from Dr. McNeal's evaluations to specific treatment centers.

Case Evaluator Treatment Center Referred
In re Marriage of Page (2014 evaluation)
KS Court of Appeals memorandum opinion, Case No. 115,071, filed Dec. 2, 2016
Dr. Rodney McNeal Lilac Center, Mission KS
Lawson v. Bolton (2025)
U.S. District Court, District of Kansas, Case No. 2:25-cv-02251 (active federal civil rights action, no adjudication on the merits)
Dr. Rodney McNeal Livingston Counseling Center, Overland Park KS

University of Kansas Connection

The Lilac Center was founded and is directed by Amy Tibbitts, LSCSW — a 1997 graduate of the University of Kansas with a master’s degree in social welfare. (Source)

Ms. Tibbitts was at KU during the mid-1990s, overlapping with Dr. McNeal’s doctoral studies at KU (1992–1998). Both were in the mental health professional pipeline at the same university during the same period.

In Howard-Page v. Page (Kansas Court of Appeals memorandum opinion filed December 2, 2016, Case No. 115,071), the published opinion expressly recites: “the district court ordered [the mother] to undergo a full psychological evaluation with Dr. Rodney McNeal” and that, “[a]s a result of [Dr. McNeal’s] testimony, the district court ordered [the mother] to undergo treatment and counseling at the Lilac Center.” This is the same Kansas-based treatment center that has been independently identified in connection with Dr. McNeal’s evaluations across multiple years.

This exclusive referral to a KU-connected provider, combined with the undisclosed conflict of interest documented in the University of Kansas Conflict section below, suggests a pattern of directing court-ordered proceedings to individuals within Dr. McNeal’s University of Kansas network.

Both the Lilac Center and Livingston Counseling Center market court-involved therapy and reintegration therapy services in the Kansas City metropolitan area.

No finding of improper conduct has been made by any licensing board or court regarding these referrals. This table documents publicly available information about referral patterns.

Professional Background

Education
PhD, Clinical Child Psychology — University of Kansas (1998)
Charter class of KU Clinical Child Psychology Program (entered 1992)
MBA
Licensure
Kansas: LP-1277 (BSRB)
Missouri: #2018005504
University Affiliation — KORA-Confirmed
Two University of Kansas affiliate appointments confirmed via Kansas Open Records Act (KORA Request #26-121, response received March 26, 2026):
  • Appointment #1: Adjunct Faculty/Staff, Department of Psychology, Dole Human Development Center.
    Dates: 10/23/2019 – 05/31/2022. Submitted by Ric Steele Jr.
  • Appointment #2 (RENEWAL): Adjunct Professor, Clinical Child Psychology Program, Dole Human Development Center, Room 2010.
    Dates: 02/16/2026 – 05/31/2028. Submitted by Rachel DaPron.

The 2026–2028 renewal confirms Dr. McNeal is currently an active KU faculty member in Dole Human Development Center, Room 2010. The McNeal Student Award for Outstanding Teaching was established at KU's Clinical Child Psychology Program in 1999, named for Jerry and Willie McNeal.

Source: KORA-released KU records (March 2026). Records release was issued in two parts; a third part (correspondence) was denied at the agency level and the denial is on appeal.

Practice
Vordis Behavioral Health LLC (dba Vordis Group)
Services include custody evaluations, court-ordered evaluations, and psychological assessments
Phone: (913) 432-2400

Zero Court Oversight — Confirmed in Writing

On March 12, 2026, Zach Smith, Legal Counsel for the 16th Judicial Circuit of Missouri (Jackson County), responded in writing to a Sunshine Law request (RSMo § 610.010) for records of all cases in which Dr. McNeal was appointed as an evaluator. His response confirmed:

1. The court “does not currently retain a report or other record containing the information you requested.”

2. The court is “not required to create such a record under the Missouri Sunshine Law.”

3. He cited Jones v. Jackson County Circuit Court, 162 S.W.3d 53, 60 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005) for the proposition that the Sunshine Law only requires disclosure of existing records, not creation of new ones.

This means the 16th Judicial Circuit has no centralized system for tracking which evaluators are appointed to which cases, how frequently any individual evaluator is appointed, or whether appointed evaluators are disclosing conflicts of interest. There is no audit trail. There is no oversight mechanism.

Dr. McNeal operates across multiple jurisdictions — Jackson County (Missouri) and Johnson County (Kansas) — with no court in any jurisdiction monitoring his appointments, his conduct, or his conflict disclosures.

Full Correspondence — Reproduced Verbatim

The original Sunshine Law request and the court’s response are reproduced below in full. Both are public records. Personal contact information has been included as it appears on the originals.

Original Request — Sent via Certified Mail, March 4, 2026

March 4, 2026


Custodian of Records

16th Judicial Circuit of Missouri

415 E. 12th Street

Kansas City, MO 64106


Re: Missouri Sunshine Law Request (RSMo § 610.010 et seq.)


Dear Custodian of Records:


Pursuant to the Missouri Sunshine Law (RSMo § 610.010 et seq.), I respectfully request the following public records:


All records showing every case in which Dr. Rodney E. McNeal was appointed as a court-ordered psychological evaluator or custody evaluator in Jackson County Circuit Court from January 1, 2018 to the present date.


For each case, please provide:

  • Case number
  • Date of appointment order
  • Date the evaluation report was filed with the court
  • Name of the presiding judge (if available)

Please provide the information in spreadsheet or list format if possible. I am willing to pay reasonable copying or search fees.


As required under RSMo § 610.023, I request a response within three (3) business days of receipt of this letter. If any portion of this request is denied, please provide a written explanation and the specific legal basis for the denial as required by statute.


Respectfully,


[Sunshine Law Requester]

[address redacted]

[email redacted]

Sent via USPS Certified Mail — Postmarked March 4, 2026 (tracking number redacted)

Court Response — From Zach Smith, Legal Counsel, 16th Judicial Circuit

16th Judicial Circuit of Missouri

415 E. 12th Street

Kansas City, MO 64106

816-881-3668


Beverly A. Newman
Court Administrator

Zach Smith
Legal Counsel


March 12, 2026


[Requester]
[address redacted]


Re: Correspondence dated March 4, 2026


Dear [Requester]:


I am Legal Counsel for the 16th Judicial Circuit of Missouri, located in Jackson County. I have reviewed your correspondence that was dated March 4, 2026, and addressed to “Custodian of Records.” A copy of your correspondence was received by the Custodian of Records for the 16th Judicial Circuit of Missouri on March 9, 2026, and is attached. I am responding on behalf of the Custodian of Records for the 16th Judicial Circuit of Missouri to your correspondence.


In your correspondence, you indicated your request was “Pursuant to the Missouri Sunshine Law (RSMo § 610.010 et seq.).” In your request, you asked for “All records showing every case in which Dr. Rodney E. McNeal was appointed as a court-ordered psychological evaluator or custody evaluator in Jackson County Circuit Court from January 1, 2018 to the present date.”


Please be aware that the Missouri Sunshine Law applies to “judicial entities when operating in an administrative capacity.” § 610.010(4) RSMo. Administrative capacity has been defined to include records concerning property and budget matters of the court. Mo. S. Ct. Op. Rule 20.02(b). Your request does not appear to ask for any records where the 16th Judicial Circuit of Missouri is operating in an administrative capacity. Rather, you are asking for records that would have been created during litigation and may be contained in a specific case file. Those documents would not have been created by the 16th Judicial Circuit of Missouri in its administrative capacity, and thus are not subject to disclosure under the Missouri Sunshine Law.


Additionally, the record you seek is not an existing record. Under the Missouri Sunshine Law, a request for records must seek an existing record, and “[t]he plain language of the Sunshine Law does not require a public governmental body to create a new record upon request, but only to provide access to existing records held or maintained by the public governmental body.” Jones v. Jackson County Circuit Court, 162 S.W.3d 53, 60 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005). The Court does not currently retain a report or other record containing the information you requested and is not required to create such a record under the Missouri Sunshine Law. Resultingly, no records are being produced responsive to your request.


Respectfully,


[Signed]


Zach Smith
Legal Counsel
zachary.smith@courts.mo.gov
Phone: 816-881-3668
Fax: 816-881-3164

Translation: The court that appoints Dr. McNeal has no record of how many times he has been appointed, in which cases, by which judges, or whether he has disclosed conflicts of interest. No such record exists. They are not required to create one. There is no oversight.

Both documents reproduced verbatim from originals. The Sunshine Law request was sent via USPS Certified Mail on March 4, 2026. The response is a public record from a public official acting in his official capacity and is not subject to confidentiality restrictions.

State-by-State Comparison — Evaluator Oversight

Other states solved the problem of custody evaluator accountability years ago. Missouri has not.

Requirement Missouri California
Rule of Court 5.220
Ohio
Sup.R. 91
Approved evaluator list No Yes Yes
Conflict disclosure required No Yes — mandatory, to court + all parties Yes
Centralized appointment tracking No — confirmed in writing by court legal counsel Yes Yes — via approved roster
Formal complaint process No Yes — formal procedures Yes — written record per evaluator (Sup.R. 91.09)
Removal from approved list No — no list exists Yes Yes — formal removal process
Training / licensing verification Active license only Yes — under penalty of perjury Yes — continuing education required
Report content standards None codified Yes — must distinguish data from opinion Yes — methodology must be documented

California requires evaluator conflict disclosure. Ohio maintains complaint files on every evaluator. Missouri’s own legal counsel confirmed they don’t even track which cases their evaluators are assigned to.

Sources: California Rules of Court, Rule 5.220 (Family Code §§ 3110–3118); Ohio Rules of Superintendence, Rule 91 (Sup.R. 91.01–91.11); Zach Smith, Legal Counsel, 16th Judicial Circuit of Missouri, written response dated March 12, 2026.

File a Complaint

If you have experienced similar conduct from Dr. McNeal, you have the right to file complaints with the following regulatory bodies. All complaint filings are free.

Share Your Experience

If Dr. McNeal was involved in your custody case and you experienced similar issues, you are not alone. Multiple families across Kansas and Missouri have independently raised the same concerns. Your experience may help others.

Submitting opens your email client with the message pre-filled to joshevans1973@proton.me. Submissions are confidential unless you consent to public use. This is not a legal service and does not create any professional relationship. Your information may be used to identify patterns and support regulatory complaints. If your email client does not open, send your message directly to joshevans1973@proton.me.

General Research on Children in the Child Welfare System

The following statistics are drawn from peer-reviewed studies and federal data. They reflect general outcomes for children who come into contact with Child Protective Services or enter foster care. This information is not tied to any specific evaluator or case.

CPS Investigation Outcomes (No Removal Required)

Fragile Families & Child Wellbeing Study — Princeton University (2023)

Children who had CPS contact (measured at age 15) showed:

29% increase in externalizing behavior
27% increase in internalizing behavior
7.5% increase in depression
6.9% increase in anxiety
5.5% increase in school troubles

Study conclusion: "Despite a federal mandate to improve child wellbeing, we found no evidence that contact with the child welfare system improves child outcomes."

Educational Outcomes — University of Wisconsin (2024)

Children investigated by CPS but never placed in foster care, compared to equally low-income peers with no CPS contact:

On-time diploma: 78% vs. 87%
Dropout rate: 13% vs. 7%
Suspensions/expulsions: 29% vs. 18%
Special education: 27% vs. 16%

Font & Palmer, "Left Behind? Educational Disadvantage, Child Protection, and Foster Care," Child Abuse & Neglect, 2024

Scale of Investigation

37.4% of all U.S. children will be investigated by CPS before age 18
Kim, Wildeman, Jonson-Reid & Drake, American Journal of Public Health, 2017

56.2% of investigated cases are unsubstantiated (no evidence of maltreatment found)
HHS Child Maltreatment Report, FFY 2024

Foster Care Placement

Published Research on Children in Foster Care

4x more likely to be sexually abused — children in foster care vs. peers not in the system
Johns Hopkins University study

28x more likely to be abused — children placed in group homes
Johns Hopkins University study

1 in 3 foster children reported abuse by a foster parent or adult in the home
Oregon & Washington state study

Important: This section presents general research on the child welfare system. This site does not claim, suggest, or imply any causal link between any individual evaluator — including Dr. McNeal — and these statistics. The data is provided as context for understanding the stakes when custody evaluations result in changes to a child's living arrangement.

Sources: Evangelist et al. 2023 (Fragile Families)Font & Palmer 2024Kim et al. 2017BYU Ballard BriefNCCPR

Legal Disclaimer: This website is an exercise of First Amendment-protected speech. All information presented is sourced from publicly available records, including published court opinions, federal and state court dockets, the CMS National Provider Identifier Registry, healthcare review platforms (Healthgrades, RateMDs), and educational review platforms (Rate My Professors). No confidential, sealed, or protected information appears on this site.

The inclusion of court cases on this site does not constitute an assertion that allegations in pending cases have been proven, unless specifically noted as a published court opinion. Reviews are reproduced verbatim from their original public sources and attributed accordingly.

This site is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or operated by any regulatory body, court, law firm, or the University of Kansas. It is operated independently as a consumer information resource.

If you believe any information on this site is inaccurate, please contact us and we will promptly review and correct it.