Torres v. Polis

── Torres v. Polis ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Date: April 24, 2026 Category: General Appellate Case: 25-1115 Document: 23-1 Date Filed: 04/24/2026 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT April 24, 2026 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court FELIX MAURO TORRES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. No. 25-1115 (D.C. No. 1:24-CV-00142-SKC-KAS) JARED POLIS, Governor; PAX LEIA (D. Colo.) MOULTRIE, Judge; DENVER DISTRICT COURT FAMILY DIVISION; VANESSA GUZMAN, Defendants - Appellees. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT * _________________________________ Before BACHARACH, McHUGH, and ROSSMAN, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Feliz Mauro Torres, proceeding pro se, brought this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against Judge Pax Leia Moultrie, Governor Jared Polis, the Denver District Court Family Division 1 (collectively, the state defendants), and his ex-wife Vanessa After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined * unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. As the magistrate judge observed, the state defendants indicated the correct 1 entity was the Denver Juvenile Court. R. vol. II at 24–25 n.1, 118 n.1. The state defendants make the same point again on appeal. See Aplee. Resp. Br. at 1 n.1. But  Appellate Case: 25-1115 Document: 23-1 Date Filed: 04/24/2026 Page: 2 Guzman, alleging they violated his parental rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. 2 The district court dismissed all claims, adopting the recommendation of a United States Magistrate Judge. Mr. Torres did not object to the recommendation. He now appeals. Under this court’s firm waiver rule, Mr. Torres waived his right to appellate review. Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm. I A custody dispute forms the backdrop of this appeal. Mr. Torres and Ms. Guzman were married in June 2018 and separated six months later in December. Their son was born in August 2019. Since then, Mr. Torres alleges Ms. Guzman has “forcefully and deliberately prevented [him] from vesting his rightful relationship with” his son and eventually prohibited visitation “without a court order.” R. vol. II at 16. In December 2023, Denver District Court Judge Pax Leia Moultrie held a hearing “on the matter of [Mr. Torres’s] right to access and parent” his son. Id. at 14. Mr. Torres describes the court’s ruling as placing two conditions on his parental access: (1) that he “engage a Court appointed Guardian Ad Litem for [his] son”; and (2) that he “prove financial worthiness.” Id. neither the magistrate judge nor the district court discussed the matter further. Because our disposition does not turn on the precise identity of that entity, we need not resolve the naming issue. 2 Because Mr.