Home » 3 - Investigations » Archive by State

The Wrong County

A Maryland custody case involving Sarah Hornbeck and Jeffrey Reichert experienced prolonged legal battles due to a contentious address issue. Hornbeck’s initial emergency petition, filed under an incorrect Anne Arundel County address, led to years of hearings and appeals. Despite numerous jurisdiction challenges, the court upheld jurisdiction without addressing the misrepresentation of Hornbeck’s residence.

The Wrong County Read More

The 90-Day Order: How an Unprecedented Custody Decision Became Invisible Law

In February 2022, Judge Alison L. Asti ordered Jeffrey Reichert to have no contact with his son, G.R., for ninety days, disrupting their long-established custody. The unreported appellate opinion overlooked crucial case history, raising concerns about judicial consistency and transparency in contested custody cases involving allegations of parental alienation.

The 90-Day Order: How an Unprecedented Custody Decision Became Invisible Law Read More

The Standard Nobody Published: Maryland’s Amended Protective Order Law, Eight Years Without a Reported Case

A Maryland custody case once made law. Then, over six years and five more appeals, Reichert v. Hornbeck generated a body of unreported family-law rulings that resolved recurring questions but never entered the state’s published precedent. This article examines what that means for litigants, lawyers, and the public.
Grounded in the article’s opening and its explanation of the five unreported opinions and their impact.

The Standard Nobody Published: Maryland’s Amended Protective Order Law, Eight Years Without a Reported Case Read More

Five Appeals, No Precedent: How One of Maryland’s Most Litigated Custody Cases Disappeared Into the Shadows

In 2013, the Maryland custody case Reichert v. Hornbeck set legal precedents but generated five unreported opinions that became invisible in family law discussions. These opinions addressed crucial issues like protective orders and child support yet lacked publication, highlighting systemic transparency problems in Maryland’s family law, affecting future cases significantly.

Five Appeals, No Precedent: How One of Maryland’s Most Litigated Custody Cases Disappeared Into the Shadows Read More

Inside the California Custody Cartel

Brenna Gano’s experience in California’s family court highlights a troubling system where justice is influenced by financial interests. Misled and pressured into signing agreements, she faced excessive costs and neurological biases that labeled her as unstable. Her case exemplifies a broader pattern of exploitation for profit within family court practices, jeopardizing families’ well-being.

Inside the California Custody Cartel Read More

She Slipped the Cuffs, Fought Two Officers, Drove Impaired — Then Walked Away Clean. Years Later, Under Oath, She Said She Didn’t Remember.

A deposition revealed that attorney Sarah Hornbeck admitted under oath to a 2018 DUI arrest and a guilty plea, contradicting her legal filings. Despite her claims, the records raise concerns about probation violations and her inconsistent memory regarding significant incidents, all occurring amid an ongoing custody dispute.

She Slipped the Cuffs, Fought Two Officers, Drove Impaired — Then Walked Away Clean. Years Later, Under Oath, She Said She Didn’t Remember. Read More

The Annapolis Money Machine in 2026: Who’s Spending, Who’s Benefiting, and What Should Raise Eyebrows

Maryland’s early 2026 campaign finance data reveals a political landscape dominated by insiders rather than public engagement. With over half of expenditures funneled into political committees and slates, the system prioritizes maintaining power over voter persuasion. This cycle underscores a troubling culture of opacity, where campaign money supports a self-serving machine, not the electorate.

The Annapolis Money Machine in 2026: Who’s Spending, Who’s Benefiting, and What Should Raise Eyebrows Read More

Sarah Hornbeck’s Deposition Disaster: Five Admissions That Expose a Reckless Witch Hunt Masquerading as Justice

In the custody case Reichert v. Hornbeck, attorney Sarah Hornbeck’s deposition revealed alarming admissions that undermine her accusations against ex-husband Jeffrey Reichert. Her reckless actions, including reporting incidents without knowing the child’s location and relying on hearsay from biased witnesses, raise serious questions about her credibility. All charges against Reichert were dismissed, suggesting her motives were more about control than safety.

Sarah Hornbeck’s Deposition Disaster: Five Admissions That Expose a Reckless Witch Hunt Masquerading as Justice Read More

Hornbeck’s Panic Play: Motion to Dismiss Filed Days After Deposition Raised Questions About Basis for Criminal Charges

Sarah Hornbeck has filed a Motion to Dismiss in the federal case Reichert v. Hornbeck after a deposition where she faltered under questioning regarding the evidence for her criminal charges against ex-husband Jeff Reichert. Critics claim her motion is a desperate attempt to avoid accountability in a long custody battle that alienated Reichert from their son.

Hornbeck’s Panic Play: Motion to Dismiss Filed Days After Deposition Raised Questions About Basis for Criminal Charges Read More