Disclaimer: All facts gleaned from the filings stated hereafter are only as truthful as the petitioner. The tone of this article expresses a style of writing historically employed by America’s greatest writers and, as such, is for opinion purposes only. No intentional harm is due. Do not read if the topic of divorce (even your own) causes you emotional distress. Continue at your own risk.
A file opened in the Circuit Court of Jackson County carries the title In Re: Ortiz v. Ortiz. The petition for dissolution of marriage was filed January 26, 2026, under case number 2616-FC01200. Ryan Ortiz appears as petitioner, through counsel, and Jessica Ortiz as respondent.
Ryan Ortiz states he has been a resident of the State of Missouri for more than ninety days immediately preceding the filing and resides in Kansas City, Missouri. Jessica Ortiz is likewise identified as having been a resident of Missouri for more than ninety days prior to the filing, with an address in Paola, Kansas set out in the petition. The parties were married October 23, 2021, in Clay County, Missouri, where the marriage was registered.
The petition records that no children were born of the marriage and that the respondent is not now pregnant. It further affirms that neither party is an active member of the Armed Forces of the United States or its allies. The parties have separated and are stated to be in agreement as to the dissolution of the marriage.
According to the filing, there is no reasonable likelihood that the marriage can be preserved and it is described as irretrievably broken. The petition states that the parties have agreed on all assets and debts and that both are capable of supporting themselves and paying their own attorney’s fees. It asks the court to dissolve the marriage, divide marital assets and debts equally or as agreed, bar maintenance for either party, and restore the respondent’s maiden name.
January filings often mark a turn from private decision to formal adjudication. In this case, the language is direct and measured, setting out residency, dates, and agreement. The court’s role now is to review those representations against statutory requirements and, if satisfied, to enter a decree that closes the record as plainly as it was opened.
Please contact VowBreakers for access to documents related to the case.
