By Michael Phillips | Originally posted on MDBayNews.com

Now that the initial shock has worn off, it’s time to roll the sleeves up and start taking a deeper dive into the Reichart v. Horbeck case.

INTRODUCTION

What happens when a father with primary custody for years is suddenly stripped of his parental rights? And not because of any crime or any other negative act or action by that father. It’s because a court simply refuses to listen.

Why do they refuse to listen? Well, that’s where this investigation comes in, seeking answers on decisions that appear to have nothing to do with family law, with the child, or any facts presented in this case. Is this blowback for the law career of a disabled veteran, which spans working for the U.S. Army JAG, the US Attorney’s office, General Counsel to one of Maryland’s largest employers — Allegis Group, and several other high-profile private clients?

For Jeff Reichert, a father in Maryland, these questions have become his lived reality. Over the course of 15 years and more than 16 judges, he has faced a relentless legal onslaught in a custody battle over his son Grant that many believe has been tainted by bias, secrecy, and systemic abuse. He has been denied the right to defend himself, had his motions repeatedly rejected without explanation, and watched as appellate courts issued rulings but refused to publish them — effectively erasing his legal battles from the public record.

This is the case Maryland doesn’t want you to see.
This is Reichert v. Hornbeck.

THE BACKSTORY: A FAMILY FRACTURED

The case began all the way back in 2009 with the end of a troubled 18-month marriage between Jeff Reichert and Sarah Hornbeck. After years of emotional conflict, the separation spiraled into a full-scale legal war — one that would stretch across multiple jurisdictions, protective orders, and a series of escalating false allegations.

What makes this case different isn’t just the conflict — it’s the extent to which the legal system enabled it.

A SYSTEM STACKED AGAINST HIM

Jeff has:

• Faced protective orders based on unproven or retracted claims
• Been denied discovery, including basic information about his child’s upbringing
• Seen his visitation rights suspended without due process
• Been labeled a threat without any criminal conviction or findings of abuse

Despite presenting evidence and formally challenging allegations, the courts consistently ruled against him — often without explanation.

“They never said I was dangerous. They just treated me like I didn’t matter.” – Jeff Reichert

THE UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS: ERASING THE RECORD

Perhaps the most chilling part of this case is what happened at the appellate level. On at least four occasions, the Appellate Court of Maryland ruled on Jeff’s appeals — but refused to publish their opinions. This is despite multiple requests, and the fact that earlier opinions have been published in the case. Are they trying to reverse course with the unpublished opinions? What is the state trying to hide?

In Maryland, unpublished opinions:

• Cannot be cited in future cases
• Cannot be meaningfully reviewed by the public
• Often escape scrutiny even when they raise constitutional issues

The Gist: Unpublished opinions are appellate decisions that do not become part of binding case law and are excluded from legal citation in future cases.

Why would a case involving parental rights, due process violations, and apparent judicial misconduct be buried from public view?
And what happens to the next parent if these decisions are never brought to light?

THE PLAYERS INVOLVED

• Jeff Reichert – A father fighting to stay in his son’s life.
• Sarah Hornbeck – The mother, accused of manipulating protective orders and using court threats to block contact, criminal background, shady past.
• Grant Reichert – The minor child at the center of the legal dispute whom has repeatedly expressed his desire to live with his father and his complete disdain for his mother.
• Maryland Judiciary – At least 16 judges involved, with no consistent explanation or relief.
• Court-Appointed Figures – GALs and others with alleged conflicts of interest and unchecked influence.
• Friends, Family, & Caretakers – Those responsible for Grant’s care, those who refuse to talk, interfere with the process, or are actively supporting Jeff’s case.

THE BIGGER QUESTIONS

• Is the family court system in Maryland operating outside constitutional law?
• Are appellate courts using “unpublished opinions” to avoid setting precedent?
• Are there external influences affecting the outcomes of Jeff’s case filings and being able to see his son?
• How many other parents have had their rights quietly erased?

MOVING FORWARD

The Reichert v. Hornbeck case isn’t just about one father. It’s about a legal system that has abandoned transparency, where parental rights can be destroyed not with evidence — but with silence and shadiness.

More is coming. This is just the beginning.

Read Next in the Series

• The Man Fighting the System: Who Is Jeff Reichert?
• The Woman Behind the Curtain: Who Is Sarah Hornbeck?
• The Child At the Center Of It All: Who Is Grant Reichert and how has he been affected?
• 16 Judges, 0 Relief: How Maryland Courts Erased a Father
• How “Unpublished Opinions” Are Used to Hide Family Court Corruption

If you or someone you know has experienced something similar, contact us or submit your story to be featured in this ongoing investigation.

Join the Fight for Transparency

• Follow updates on Substack and at MDBayNews.com.
• Donate and support our legal reform work.
• Share this story — justice depends on it.