Investigative Journalism | Exposing What Lies Beneath
Jeffrey Reichert hasn’t seen his son since 2022. Every criminal charge filed against him failed. Yet he lost custody—and contact. This investigation examines how it happened, and what it reveals about Maryland’s family court system.
On Parental Alienation Awareness Day, Rhonda Reyna’s story exposes a disturbing inversion inside the family court system: the very label meant to protect children from manipulation is increasingly used against the parent raising legitimate safety concerns. As documented warnings go ignored and protective actions are reframed as “alienation,” the system meant to safeguard families instead becomes the mechanism separating them.
The Mother the System Called the Problem Read More
Brenna Gano’s tumultuous experience in San Mateo County family court culminated in a misleading Zoom mediation on February 15, 2022, where she faced undue pressure to sign a Memorandum of Agreement regarding custody and finances. This occurred amid a financial disparity and lack of proper legal representation, leading to claims of duress and calls for the agreement to be set aside.
The Ambush Read More
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
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
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.
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
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
The article highlights the risks parents face in private judging during family court proceedings, often unaware of its binding nature. Many experience significant pressure and confusion, leading to irreversible agreements without fully understanding the consequences. It emphasizes the need for clarity and proper legal guidance before consenting to such processes.
When Family Court Leaves the Courtroom Read More
Since 1997, the federal government has paid states over $1 billion in adoption incentives, encouraging adoptions instead of family reunification. While foster care numbers declined, adoption assistance payments surged by nearly 43% in recent years, highlighting a troubling financial structure favoring permanent separations over reunifications.
Follow the money: how $1 billion in federal bonuses built an incentive to separate families Read More