Brendon Kohrs

Brendon J. Kohrs was the first guardian ad litem (GAL) for my sons in my custody case, Summit County Domestic Relations Court, DR-2022-03-0667. The court appointed him five days after it took my sons from me. In seven months he billed 13.3 hours. He never spoke with either of my sons alone, and he never filed a report. Then he left the case to become a magistrate in another county.

This is the third page in a series about the professionals in my case, in the order they came into it. Each page says what went wrong and points to the dated document behind it. I am not a lawyer; where I name a rule or statute, I am saying what I believe it covers.

Who he is, and what a GAL is supposed to do

Attorney Kohrs (Ohio registration no. 0077633) practiced law in Stow when he was appointed. Today he is a Domestic Relations magistrate in Portage County, according to that court's public staff listing. His own motion says he accepted the position with a starting date of "January 30, 2022." From the timing, that should read 2023.

A guardian ad litem works for the court, not for either parent. The job is to investigate and recommend what is in the children's best interest. Ohio's GAL rule lists the duties "unless specifically relieved by the court": among them, to "observe the child with each parent," "interview the child, if age and developmentally appropriate, where no parent ... is present," "ascertain the wishes and concerns of the child," "interview ... other significant individuals who may have relevant knowledge," and "interview relevant school personnel, medical and mental health providers" (Sup.R. 48.03(D), now 8.03(D)). Summit County's own local rule adds that the GAL will "meet with child alone as often as time permits" (Loc.R. 34.04(B)).

June 13, 2022: the appointment

Judge Steinhauer gave my ex-husband temporary custody on June 8, 2022. That order said my sons' wishes were "currently unknown" and that no GAL had been assigned (see the Valenti page, Exhibits V-3 and V-4). On June 13 she appointed Attorney Kohrs at $75 an hour, capped at 16 hours ($1,200) without the court's permission. Each parent was ordered to deposit $612 by June 30. A second entry the same day gave him "unfettered access to the children" and "full authority to speak with the children outside the presence of all parties," including at school. It also ordered him to comply with Sup.R. 48, "including filing of the GAL report at least seven (7) days prior to any initial hearings, final evidentiary hearing, and any hearing upon a motion requesting a change in disposition," unless the judge directed otherwise.

June and July 2022: waiting

On June 15, 2022, Kimberly Valenti emailed Attorney Kohrs my contact information, "per communication with Jeannie at the court." Then I waited. I asked Kimberly on June 16, 17, 21 and 23 and on July 5 when the GAL would contact me. On June 23 I wrote: "It's now been almost three weeks since I've been with my kids except for an hour two Saturdays ago - the GAL still hasn't contacted me - is there a timeframe they're supposed to do that in?" (iMessages with Kimberly Valenti, 6/15–7/5/2022.)

His time log, filed with his fee request, shows a five-minute entry, "Assigned to case creation of the file," dated June 8, 2022. The next entry is August 1, 2022, "Reviewed the docket." That is 49 days after the appointment with no logged work. To be fair, the record also shows the first pretrial, set for June 27, was continued to August 2 on my own side's motion. In the meantime, the July 22 contempt hearing on my ex-husband's motion was continued because, in the docket's words, the motion "is being investigated." The log shows no investigation until August. My ex-husband's own pretrial statement of October 17, 2022 says that hearing was continued because it "overlapped with matters that were being investigated by the Guardian ad Litem." I find no new date for it on the docket.

The GAL rule says a guardian "shall perform responsibilities in a prompt and timely manner" (Sup.R. 48.03(G), now 8.03(G)). Seven weeks of silence, while my sons were newly separated from me and I was asking for contact, is not prompt.

The court kept relying on him in the meantime. The August 2, 2022 pretrial order, made on his recommendation, let Scott Stutler supervise my visits and gave me a daily Zoom call with my sons of up to an hour. It said the Zoom recordings were to be given to the GAL on request.

I recorded those calls. My Dropbox holds more than 100 recordings of my Zoom calls with my sons, dated from August 12, 2022 to January 9, 2023; 13 of them, from August 27 to December 16, I labeled as no-shows. His log shows no request for any recording and no time spent reviewing one.

What his own time log shows

On January 11, 2023, Attorney Kohrs filed a motion for his fees, with a one-page time log. It is the only record I have of his whole investigation.

Here is what I read in it:

• He never spoke with either of my sons alone. In seven months he never talked with my sons outside the presence of a parent, and nothing records what they wanted. He saw them only on home visits: twice at their father's home (August 24 and October 25) and once at mine, with the visit supervisor present (September 15). My Older Son was then in grade school and my Younger Son in preschool.
• Time with each parent. As logged: 130 minutes with me (a 10-minute call, a one-hour office interview, and the one home visit) and 215 minutes with or about my ex-husband (a 5-minute call, an office interview, two home visits, and 30 minutes reviewing "Father's packet of information provided").
• Records he reviewed. The log lists the docket (60 minutes) and "Father's packet." It lists no review of anything from me. On August 20, 2022 Kimberly texted me, "Upload all. It's all going to Mr.Kohrs and the courts."
• Collateral contacts. One 30-minute call with the visit supervisor, Scott Stutler. Letters on August 29 to five places: the local police, children's services, two counseling offices and my sons' school. There are no logged follow-ups, no logged interview with anyone at the school, and, after the letter to my therapist's practice, no logged call or interview with her (below). The school's principal, Erin Faetanini, later testified that she tried to reach him and never heard back (below).
• The boys' counselor. Two hours at her deposition on September 29, where he asked no questions, and a 30-minute "discussion with Lori Long after the deposition."
• Court time. The August 2 pretrial, the October 17 and December 30 hearings, and pretrials on November 29 and January 11, 2023.

The log is out of order: a September 27 entry appears after December 30. The counselor also testified during the September 29 deposition that she had "just got a call today from Brendon Kohrs" about a visit the previous Saturday (Long dep. 9/29/22, p. 23). The log shows only the deposition and a discussion "after the deposition." The rule requires a GAL to "keep accurate records of the time spent, services rendered, and expenses incurred," and in custody cases to "provide a monthly statement of fees and expenses to all parties" (Sup.R. 48.03(H)(1)–(2)).

August 2, 5, 9 and September 15, 2022: court, a mix-up, his office, then my home

I first saw him at court on August 2, 2022, seven weeks after his appointment, at the initial pretrial at 9:30 AM. His log bills 60 minutes for it. His first contact with me came that same morning: at 9:22 AM he texted me two things: his office address and "Aug 5 at 9a." Nothing in the text said the interview was at his office. That afternoon I texted, "Guardian is coming Friday," and on the evening of August 4: "Guardian comes tomorrow 9am."

My calendar for August 5 says "Guardian" at 10:30 AM. That morning, at 8:51 AM, Kimberly texted me, "Don't tell him Mr. Kohrs is coming," meaning the visit supervisor. His log for August 5 records the day as a no-show for my interview: "Mother's initial interview and she did not show. I called and she [said] I was coming to her home for the interview. Rescheduled." He billed 10 minutes for that call. At 1:47 PM I texted Kimberly, "I see brendan Tuesday." At 2:36 PM she wrote back that I "did not tell us Mr. Kohrs has text you his office address and that the meeting was to be there. We have handled that today."

On August 8 Kimberly sent me the schedule for the next day: "10:00 a.m. Mr. Kohrs, Guardian ad Litem (at 9:15 call Mr. Kohrs office to confirm)." On August 9, 2022 I had my first interview with him, in his office. His log: "Met with Mother in the office," 60 minutes. That hour, the 10-minute call on August 5 and the home visit on September 15 are all the time his log shows with me.

His log records the mix-up as my no-show. The text he sent gave an address and a time and nothing else, and my own texts and calendar that week show I expected him at my home. On August 16, when Kimberly asked when my interview had been, I answered, "Last Tuesday," August 9.

Our second meeting was at my home, five weeks later. On August 31 I texted the visit supervisor that the guardian "was supposed to come last Tuesday" but that the visit had been delayed by a schedule change, and on September 1 I asked, "He coming today?" He came on September 15, 2022, for one hour, with my sons and the visit supervisor there. That morning Kimberly texted me to "focus on your GAL visit today." His log: home visit with Mother, 60 minutes. It was the only time he saw my sons with me, and he never came back.

So the order was: August 2, I first saw him, at court; August 5, the mix-up over where we were to meet; August 9, our first meeting, at his office; September 15, our second meeting, at my home. By then he had already met my ex-husband at his office (August 17) and visited his home with the boys (August 24), and he went back to my ex-husband's home on October 25.

August 2022 – February 2023: every text between us

These are all the texts between Attorney Kohrs and me in my iPhone's message records. There are eight. The first is from August 2, 2022, seven weeks after his appointment. None is from him after September 16, 2022.

I did not reply to his August 2 text. He never answered my September 16 request or the contact I sent on September 18 by text; his log shows no call with my therapist.

My therapist: one letter, no call back

On August 10, 2022 I gave my lawyer my therapist's number for the GAL. On September 7 I wrote that she "is wondering why the guardian hasn't called her yet." On September 16 I texted Attorney Kohrs directly to ask him to contact me about my sons' counselor. He answered, "Who is this, new phone." On September 18 I sent him my therapist's name and number. She had also seen my Older Son and his father in 2019. On October 5 I wrote that the guardian "STILL has not called my therapist," and on December 14: "Stephanie called the guardian and left him two messages and the therapist three messages - neither have returned her call ever." (iMessages with Kimberly Valenti, 8/10–12/14/2022; Exhibit K-7.) His log lists one thing aimed at her practice: on August 29, 2022 one of his five letters went to "Hope Family Counseling," which is my therapist's practice (The Reality of Hope Counseling). After that the log shows no call, interview or follow-up with her. By my texts, she called him and left messages that he never returned. On December 30 I texted Kimberly, "Stephanie tried calling both brendan and Lori again and neither called back," and Kimberly answered, "I'll say something to Brendon." He wrote to her practice once. He never spoke with her and never answered her calls.

The rule says a GAL shall "become informed about the facts of the case and contact all relevant persons" and interview "medical and mental health providers" (Sup.R. 48.03(D)(1), (7)). The mental-health professional who had treated me, and had seen my son and his father, was a relevant person. A letter was sent, and she was never called back or interviewed.

Others who could not reach him

My therapist was not the only one.

• My ex-husband, August 3, 2022. In an email to the boys' counselor he wrote that he had called Brendon "yesterday" and had "yet to hear from him." (Counselor's records.)
• The boys' counselor, September 19, 2022. Her call log: "I did try and contact the GAL but he was not available." (Counselor's records.)
• The school depositions, November 11, 2022. My lawyers deposed two St. Barnabas staff members. No guardian ad litem appears in the appearances.
• The school principal, December 20, 2022. Erin K. Faetanini, principal of St. Barnabas School, was deposed at the school. Under oath, she said she had been unclear about what to do because "there was a guardian ad litem, whom I tried to contact several times, so I was unclear about what I was supposed to be doing" (p. 12, lines 17–21). She said she reached out to him again before a school meeting. Asked, "he just didn't respond?" she answered, "Correct," and said, "I believe he was invited to that meeting as well" (pp. 33–34). He is not listed among those present at that deposition. His log shows the August 29 letter to the school and nothing after it.

The rule lists, as a GAL duty, to interview "relevant school personnel, medical and mental health providers" and obtain their records (Sup.R. 48.03(D)(7), now 8.03(D)(7)). Here the school and two providers were trying to reach him.

September 29, 2022: the counselor's deposition

My lawyers deposed my sons' counselor, Lori Long, on September 29, 2022. Attorney Kohrs attended and asked her no questions (p. 40). She testified that she had spoken with the GAL once, with my ex-husband about five times, and with me once (pp. 29–30). Asked whether she had concerns about my time with the boys, she said: "I don't know mom so I really can't say I have any concerns because I don't know mom" (p. 28).

Just before that answer, while she was describing how she helps my son name his feelings, the transcript records this exchange:

My own lawyer joined in. Still, the rule asks a GAL to "act with respect and courtesy" and to keep "the appearance of fairness" in and out of the courtroom (Sup.R. 48.03(A)(2)–(3)). Joking about "that many feelings," while my son's counselor described his feelings under oath, does not meet that standard.

Two items from the counselor's own records bear on this. On October 7, 2022 she logged a call in which my lawyer "was concerned I had a bias against Mom because of what the GAL said." Her note says she assured my lawyer, "I have no bias." On November 2, 2022, after a session I attended, she noted: "Brendan Kors GAL - I need to call to report how mom is doing with the boys." The same note says the boys "were both good with Mom." His log shows no contact with her after September 29.

Drug testing he was left to decide

On June 14, 2022 my lawyer moved for mental-health and drug assessments of both parents. My ex-husband's response asked the court to hold it "in abeyance ... until such time as the Guardian ad Litem has had the opportunity to commence his investigation" (Plaintiff's response, 6/29/22). My lawyer's July 13 filing complained that the court had "transferred its authority, obligation and control over mental health and drug testing of the parties to the Guardian ad Litem."

My lawyer's notes quote the GAL's August 29, 2022 letter to the counselor. In it, he relayed my ex-husband's statement that he was participating "in the Court's recovery program" and "utilizing [the counselor's] services as part of that program." He said he was "looking to determine that he is attending, diagnosis, that he has a treatment plan, and is complying with said plan," and "not necessarily looking much beyond that at this point." The counselor's records also say that after the deposition the GAL "recommended parenting evaluations for both parents," and my ex-husband's October 17 pretrial statement says the GAL "suggested that it may be necessary to conduct a full custody evaluation." I find no logged request for drug testing. The rule lists, as a GAL duty, to request "substance abuse assessments, or other evaluations or tests of the parties as the guardian ad litem deems necessary" (Sup.R. 48.03(D)(10)). His log shows no check of the "recovery program" my ex-husband described and no request for drug testing. At the May 20, 2022 hearing my ex-husband had testified that his community control was a monthly probation meeting, four substance abuse classes and a violence class.

No report, then a new job

The court made two parenting decisions while he was GAL. After the October 17, 2022 pretrial, it ordered unsupervised Wednesday visits for me "after a review of the pleadings, update from the Guardian ad litem" (November 14 entry). On December 30 it heard "the recommendation of the Guardian ad litem" on my emergency motion and granted my sons a visit with their terminally ill grandfather. I can find no written report or summary from him at any point. The appointment order allowed "verbal reports from time to time as requested by the Court," but the same order required a GAL report at least seven days before "any hearing upon a motion requesting a change in disposition." No report was filed before either decision.

On January 9, 2023, my ex-husband's lawyer, Lisa Dean, opposed my motions as "an end run around the purview of the Guardian ad Litem." On the evening of January 10, Kimberly texted me his email address and what to write: "Only a greeting and to please see the attached. Please speak with my attorneys about this. This is the zoom with [my Younger Son]." I told her the file was too large to email and that I would upload it to Dropbox, and I sent it to him that evening. On January 11 he filed his fee motion, 13.3 hours and $997.50, with a certificate of service to the lawyers only, and the court held a status conference that its later entry says was held "due to the withdrawal of the Guardian ad litem." On January 12 he filed his motion to withdraw, and on January 13 the court ordered him paid from the deposits; Kimberly texted me, "Brendon paid himself." His reason for withdrawing was that he had "been offered a position and accepted with the Portage County Common Pleas Court Domestic Relations Division as Magistrate." The court granted it on January 20 and wrote on January 24: "Attorney Brendon Kohrs is hereby removed as the Guardian ad litem."

A new GAL, James Phillips, was appointed on January 25–27, 2023. He came to my home on February 16, 2023 and, by my texts, interviewed my sons on April 22, 2023, within three months. His work is the subject of a later page. I mention it only to show that a private interview with my sons could be arranged. In seven months, the first GAL's log shows none. The January 26, 2023 order said "remaining monies deposited with Brendon Kohrs shall be deposited with James Phillips" and ordered a new deposit of $997.50 plus $19.95, $508.72 from each parent by February 13. I paid my share, $523.98 with the card fee, on February 4, 2023. All of it is on the costs and time page.

On January 7, 2026 I asked him for an invoice of all money I had paid him. He replied the next day that he did not have me "listed as a retained client" and that any GAL billing "can be obtained through the Court docket or through records request." He added that "a GAL billing will indicate work done which is subject to both parties not one person individually."

Every contact, in order

This table lists every contact with or about the guardian that I can document, from his appointment to after he left the case: his own time log, the court's orders, my texts with him, and my texts with my lawyers about him. Between June 13 and July 31, 2022 there is no contact from him at all.

What he did do

To be fair, the record also shows this. At the August 2, 2022 pretrial he supported supervised visits for me at my home with Scott Stutler instead of at a center. My ex-husband complained about exactly that in an August 4 email to the counselor, and my lawyer put it to Mr. Stutler at his deposition (Stutler dep. 10/14/22, p. 58). Mr. Stutler testified that Attorney Kohrs was the one who recommended him (p. 25). Attorney Kohrs met with me, came to my home once, recommended evaluations for both parents, and attended every hearing on his log. After his update, the court gave me unsupervised visits, and after hearing his recommendation, it let my sons see their grandfather. He stayed within the 16-hour cap.

Evidence timeline

1. June 8, 2022Temporary custody to my ex-husband; my sons' wishes "unknown"; no GAL yet. His log: "Assigned to case creation of the file" (5 min). V-3, V-4; K-3
2. June 13, 2022Appointed: $75/hr, 16-hour cap, $612 deposit from each parent; full authority to speak with the children alone. K-1, K-2
3. June 14–15, 2022Kimberly: "Did you pay the GAL fee?" She emails him my contact information. iMessage
4. June 16 – July 5, 2022Five messages from me asking when the GAL will contact me. iMessage
5. June 27, 2022First pretrial continued to August 2 on my side's motion. Docket
6. July 20–21, 2022Contempt hearing on my ex-husband's motion continued; the docket reason: the motion "is being investigated." Docket
7. August 1–2, 2022First logged work (docket review). Initial pretrial on August 2, where I see him for the first time; that morning he texts me his office address and "Aug 5 at 9a." K-3, K-7
8. August 2–4, 2022The August 2 order lets Scott Stutler supervise on his recommendation. My texts: "Guardian is coming Friday"; "Guardian comes tomorrow 9am." 8/2/22 order; iMessage
9. August 5, 2022The mix-up over where we were to meet: his text had named no place, and my calendar says "Guardian" at 10:30 AM. His log records the interview as my no-show, a 10-minute call and "Rescheduled." Kimberly: "the meeting was to be there." K-3, K-7; my calendar; iMessages 8/5/22
10. August 8–9, 2022Calls the visit supervisor (30 min). On August 9 I have my first interview with him, at his office (60 min). K-3; iMessage 8/8/22
11. August 17 & 24, 2022Meets my ex-husband in his office; home visit with my ex-husband and the children. K-3
12. August 29, 2022Letters to police, children's services, two counseling offices (my therapist's practice and my sons' counselor) and the school; his letter to the counselor about my ex-husband's "recovery program." K-3; counsel's notes
13. September 15, 2022Our second meeting: his only home visit with me, my sons and the supervisor (60 min). K-3; iMessage 8/31, 9/1, 9/15/22
14. September 16–19, 2022I ask him to contact me about the counselor; he answers "Who is this, new phone."; I send my therapist's contact. The counselor notes she could not reach him. K-7; counselor's records
15. September 27, 2022Reviews "Father's packet of information provided" (30 min). K-3
16. September 29, 2022Counselor's deposition: no questions; "that many feelings"; 30-min discussion with her afterward. K-6; K-3
17. October 17, 2022Pretrial; the court hears his update. K-8
18. October 25, 2022Second home visit with my ex-husband and the children. K-3
19. November 14, 2022Order: unsupervised Wednesday visits for me. K-8
20. November 11, 2022Depositions of two St. Barnabas staff members; no GAL in the appearances. Transcripts; iMessage
21. December 14, 2022My text: my therapist "left him two messages," never returned. iMessage
22. December 20, 2022Principal Erin Faetanini testifies she tried to contact him several times and he did not respond. Faetanini dep. pp. 12–13, 33–34
23. December 30, 2022Hearing; the court hears his recommendation and grants the visit with my sons' grandfather. K-9
24. January 9–13, 2023Lisa Dean calls my motions "an end run around the purview of the Guardian ad Litem" (1/9). I email him a Zoom video (1/10). Fee motion, 13.3 hours, $997.50, and status conference (1/11); motion to withdraw for a magistrate job (1/12); payment order (1/13). K-3, K-4, K-5; docket
25. January 20–27, 2023Withdrawal granted; "removed"; James Phillips appointed; new deposits of $508.72 per parent. K-10; docket
26. February 4, 2023I pay my share of the new GAL deposit: $508.72 plus card fee, $523.98, to the Clerk of Courts. Chase statement, Feb. 2023
27. January 7–8, 2026I ask him for an invoice; he replies he has no record of me as a "retained client." Email

What I believe was violated

This page combines court records, texts, and my own firsthand recollections.

What it cost: time, money, resources

These amounts match the costs and time page, which keeps the running totals for my whole case.

The rules and laws, in their own words

• Rules of Superintendence for the Courts of Ohio: Sup.R. 48.03 (GAL responsibilities: (A) general, (D) duties, (G) timeliness, (H) record-keeping) and 48.06 (reports), renumbered 8.03 and 8.06 on July 1, 2026
• Summit County Domestic Relations Court, Rules of Practice and Procedure: Loc.R. 34.03 (role), 34.04 (assessment: "meet with child alone as often as time permits"), 34.06 (fees), 34.08 (GAL complaint process)
• R.C. 3109.04: allocation of parental rights; the child's wishes and in-chambers interviews (B), best-interest factors (F)(1)
• Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct: Rules 1.3, 8.4(d)
• Ohio Office of Disciplinary Counsel

Children's names, birthdates, schools and addresses are redacted from every exhibit. Exhibits are excerpts. Full copies are kept for counsel and the appropriate authorities.