A custody case became a multi-court civil rights battle.
For more than a decade, Jeffrey Reichert—a father, veteran, and attorney—has been involved in a series of legal proceedings centered on his relationship with his son, Grant Reichert.
What began as a custody matter in Maryland family court has expanded into a complex web of litigation across multiple courts, multiple jurisdictions, and multiple legal issues, including federal civil rights claims, disability discrimination, and denial of access to the courts.
Today, the case is no longer just about custody.
It is about whether a parent can be excluded from the judicial process itself—and what happens when the system allows it.
The Background
Following divorce proceedings, Jeffrey Reichert maintained a meaningful and active role in his son’s life, including periods of custody.
Over time, a series of allegations, filings, and protective order proceedings altered that trajectory. These proceedings resulted in:
- The loss of custody and parenting time
- Repeated litigation across multiple courts
- Escalating legal conflict involving both private parties and state actors
Despite the seriousness of the allegations involved, many proceedings occurred without full evidentiary hearings or meaningful participation by the father, raising ongoing concerns about due process and procedural fairness.
The Escalation
As litigation continued, the case expanded beyond family court.
According to filings in federal court, the dispute now includes allegations of:
- Abuse of process and malicious prosecution
- Denial of access to the courts
- Violations of constitutional due process and equal protection
- Disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
These claims are not theoretical—they are the subject of active federal litigation, including:
- A civil rights action currently in discovery
- A separate ADA action against court officials and institutions
- A removed case now pending in federal court after asserting federal claims
In one federal proceeding, the court recognized the need for accommodations related to disability and permitted remote participation in pretrial matters, underscoring the seriousness of access-to-court concerns.
The ADA and Access-to-Courts Issue
A central issue in this case is whether a litigant with documented disabilities was denied meaningful access to judicial proceedings.
According to a federal complaint, court officials:
- Denied requested accommodations necessary for participation
- Proceeded with hearings in the litigant’s absence
- Barred further accommodation requests while proceedings continued
These actions form the basis of a separate federal lawsuit alleging intentional discrimination and retaliation under Title II of the ADA.
The Pattern Alleged
Across multiple proceedings and filings, a consistent pattern is alleged:
- Critical decisions made without full hearings
- Repeated procedural barriers to participation
- Parallel proceedings producing compounding consequences
- Escalation from custody disputes into criminal and civil litigation
The result is not a single ruling, but a cumulative effect across multiple cases—state and federal—that has reshaped the parent-child relationship.
Where Things Stand Now
There are currently multiple active and related cases, including:
- Federal civil rights litigation
- ADA claims against court entities
- Removed state court actions now in federal jurisdiction
- Ongoing or prior state court proceedings
In total, the matter spans more than a decade of litigation and over a dozen related proceedings.
Why This Matters
This case raises broader questions that extend beyond any one family:
- What safeguards exist when a litigant is excluded from their own case?
- How are disability accommodations handled in high-conflict proceedings?
- What happens when multiple courts handle overlapping issues without coordination?
- How do procedural decisions, over time, affect fundamental parental rights?
What This Site Provides
This site is designed to make the full record accessible and understandable.
Here you will find:
- A complete timeline across all cases
- Court filings and primary documents
- Breakdowns of key legal issues
- Analysis connecting events across multiple proceedings
- Records obtained through public information requests
Every claim presented is tied to documents, filings, or testimony wherever possible.
A Continuing Case
This is not a closed matter.
Litigation is ongoing.
Records are still being obtained.
New filings continue to shape the case.
At Its Core
At its core, this case is about:
- A father and a son
- A legal system handling overlapping, high-stakes disputes
- And the question of whether access to justice was fully preserved
