By Michael Phillips | MDBayNews | Father & Co.
A recent federal disability-rights ruling involving a Maryland parent has drawn attention to a little-examined practice in family court: proceedings that continue while a parent’s ability to participate remains unresolved.
In the case of Jeffrey Reichert, multiple hearings in Anne Arundel County family court reportedly proceeded without his participation, even as he sought accommodations under federal disability law. The sequence raises broader questions about how family court records are developed—and how absence is interpreted—when access disputes remain pending.
Federal Court Recognized a Right to Accommodation
On January 13, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland granted Reichert the right to participate remotely in pretrial proceedings as a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act.
The court found that Reichert, who has a documented diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), qualified as an individual with a disability and that remote participation was a reasonable means of ensuring meaningful access to litigation.
The federal ruling did not address custody or family-law merits. It focused solely on access—specifically whether the court process itself presented a barrier to participation.
Hearings Proceeded While Access Was Unresolved
Court filings indicate that while accommodation requests were pending, at least five hearings in Reichert’s Anne Arundel County family court case went forward without his participation.
According to the filings, Reichert requested remote access in advance, citing disability-related barriers to in-person appearance. Those requests were denied or left unresolved as proceedings continued.
As a result, the court record reflects multiple instances of non-appearance, despite the later federal finding that accommodation was warranted.
Why the Record Matters
Family court records play a significant role in shaping outcomes. Attendance history, docket notes, and hearing transcripts often inform later decisions regarding custody, visitation, and credibility.
Legal observers note that when hearings proceed without a parent present—regardless of the reason—the resulting record may portray disengagement or non-compliance, even when absence stems from unresolved access issues.
Once created, those records can be difficult to unwind, even if a higher court later determines that participation barriers should have been addressed.
A Structural Timing Problem
The Reichert case highlights a timing mismatch between two systems:
- Family courts operate on expedited schedules and frequent hearings.
- ADA accommodation disputes, particularly those reaching federal court, move more slowly.
When proceedings continue during that gap, participation issues may be resolved only after key stages of a case have already occurred.
Disability-rights advocates argue that this sequencing creates a risk that access determinations arrive too late to prevent exclusion.
Questions for Maryland’s Judiciary
The case raises several unresolved questions for Maryland’s family courts:
- Should proceedings pause when a litigant raises a credible ADA access issue?
- How should courts distinguish between voluntary non-appearance and absence caused by unresolved barriers?
- What safeguards exist to prevent adverse consequences from accruing before access disputes are resolved?
Maryland courts have broad discretion in managing family-law dockets, but federal law requires that public entities—including courts—provide meaningful access to individuals with disabilities.
How those obligations are reconciled in practice remains uneven across jurisdictions.
Looking Ahead
As of publication, Reichert’s federal ADA case remains active, while the family court proceedings continue to shape the underlying record.
The outcome may influence how Maryland courts handle accommodation requests going forward—particularly whether access determinations are treated as threshold issues or procedural side matters.
MDBayNews will continue to follow developments in both the federal and state proceedings.
Keep MDBayNews Reporting Free
MDBayNews exists to help Marylanders understand decisions made by state and local leaders — especially when those decisions affect daily life, rights, and public services.
If this article helped clarify what’s happening or why it matters, reader support makes it possible to keep publishing clear, independent reporting like this.
Have a tip or documents to share?
We review submissions carefully and confidentially. Anonymous tips are welcome when appropriate.
Why This Matters for Maryland Families
Family court decisions often shape custody arrangements, visitation schedules, and parental rights long before a final order is entered. When hearings proceed without a parent’s participation—regardless of the reason—the resulting record can influence later outcomes in ways that are difficult to reverse.
For Maryland families, this raises several practical concerns:
- Participation Rights: Parents with disabilities may face barriers to participation if accommodation requests are unresolved while cases move forward.
- Fair Process: Courts rely on hearing records and attendance history when evaluating credibility, cooperation, and compliance.
- Impact on Children: Decisions made without hearing from both parents—or without hearing from the child—may affect long-term family dynamics.
- Consistency Across Courts: Accommodation practices can vary by county and courtroom, leading to uneven access to justice statewide.
- Public Confidence: Trust in family court depends on the perception that all parties are given a meaningful opportunity to be heard.
As Maryland courts continue to balance efficiency with access obligations, cases like this highlight the importance of resolving participation issues before they shape the record.
Discover more from Maryland Bay News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.