Reichert v. Hornbeck

Case No.: 24-D-10-002538
Court: Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County, Maryland

---

Executive Summary

This case arises from a high-conflict divorce and custody dispute involving allegations of procedural abuse, denial of due process, and systemic failures within Maryland’s family court system.

At its core, the case centers on the removal of a father from his child’s life, despite prior custody determinations, and raises serious concerns about how protective-order procedures and emergency filings can be misused to override established parental rights.

---

Key Issues

1. Custody Disruption Through Emergency Proceedings

Following earlier custody orders granting the father primary or substantial parental rights, subsequent emergency proceedings resulted in:

• Sudden loss of custody
• No-contact restrictions
• Ongoing separation from the child beyond the stated temporary period

These actions effectively overrode existing court orders without a full adjudication on the merits.

---

2. Use of Protective-Order System in Domestic Litigation

The case highlights repeated use of protective-order filings in parallel with custody disputes, raising concerns that:

• Protective orders were used as litigation tools rather than safety mechanisms
• Filings created collateral consequences affecting custody and access
• Courts and related institutions acted on unverified or unserved claims

This pattern is central to the broader legal claims in related proceedings.

---

3. Denial of Access to Courts

The plaintiff alleges systemic barriers to participation, including:

• Refusal to accept filings
• Limitations on appearing or being heard
• Procedural obstacles that prevented meaningful participation

These issues implicate constitutional due process protections and the right to be heard.

---

4. Disability and ADA Considerations

The plaintiff, a disabled veteran with PTSD and TBI, raised repeated requests for accommodation, including:

• Remote participation in proceedings
• Modifications to reduce harm from litigation-related triggers

Federal court proceedings have already recognized the legitimacy of these concerns and granted accommodations for pretrial participation .

---

5. Broader Civil Rights Implications

The divorce case is closely tied to parallel litigation alleging:

• Abuse of process
• Malicious prosecution
• Equal protection violations
• ADA discrimination and retaliation

These claims were formally asserted in related federal proceedings following removal from state court .

---

Factual Background

• The parties were previously subject to a custody order intended to resolve disputes.
• Subsequent filings led to repeated litigation across multiple courts.
• The plaintiff experienced arrest, incarceration, and dismissal of all related charges, which are now the subject of ongoing civil-rights litigation .
• Since February 2022, the plaintiff alleges no meaningful contact with his child, despite the temporary nature of the underlying order .

---

Why This Case Matters

This case raises fundamental questions about:

• Integrity of family court processes
• Limits of emergency and ex parte orders
• Protection of parental rights
• Access to justice for disabled litigants

It illustrates how procedural mechanisms—when misapplied—can produce long-term, irreversible consequences in parent–child relationships.

---

Current Status

The underlying disputes have expanded beyond the divorce action into state and federal litigation, including:

• Declaratory and injunctive relief actions
• ADA enforcement claims
• Ongoing federal civil rights litigation

The issues presented continue to be actively litigated.

---

Closing Statement

Case No. 24-D-10-002538 is not simply a divorce proceeding—it is part of a broader legal challenge addressing how courts balance emergency authority, due process, and fundamental parental rights.