The Hornbeck Deposition and Why It Matters for Parents Fighting in Family Court
By Michael R. Phillips | Father & Co.
For parents caught in high-conflict custody battles, the courtroom often becomes the place where narratives collide — accusations, memories, and years of personal conflict all compressed into legal filings and sworn testimony.
That dynamic was on full display in a February 2026 deposition involving Sarah Hornbeck, the defendant in a federal civil lawsuit filed by Jeffrey W. Reichert.
During the deposition, Hornbeck was questioned under oath about events that have fueled a legal conflict stretching across more than a decade: custody disputes, relocation issues, and a 2018 arrest that overlapped with escalating litigation between the parents.
For parents who have been through the family court system, the deposition reads like a familiar story — a long-running dispute where the truth often becomes buried beneath years of allegations, filings, and competing narratives.
But sworn testimony has a way of cutting through that fog.
And the Hornbeck deposition offers a rare look at what happens when those narratives are tested under oath.
A Case That Grew Far Beyond Family Court
What began as a custody dispute between two parents has now expanded into federal litigation, a rare but increasingly visible path for parents who believe the family court system has failed to address their claims.
Reichert’s lawsuit places years of conflict under a new level of scrutiny.
Depositions are one of the most important stages in civil litigation. Witnesses must answer questions under oath, and those answers become part of the official record that attorneys can compare against emails, court filings, and other documentation.
For parents watching from the outside, depositions often reveal something family court proceedings rarely do: the opportunity to ask direct questions about events that shaped years of litigation.
The 2018 Arrest
One of the most notable moments in the deposition involved a March 2018 arrest in Charles County.
Under questioning, Hornbeck confirmed that the arrest involved charges including driving under the influence and assault on a law enforcement officer, stemming from what she described as a drug and alcohol incident.
When asked about the outcome of the case, Hornbeck testified that it resulted in probation before judgment, a common Maryland legal outcome that allows a defendant to avoid a conviction if probation is completed successfully.
“I believe one year of unsupervised probation,” she said.
When Reichert’s attorney referenced court records showing that the probation period lasted two years and ended in August 2020, Hornbeck acknowledged that the timeline “sounds approximately correct.”
The timing matters.
The probation period overlapped with a phase when the conflict between the parents was intensifying and custody disputes were continuing in court.
Questions About Earlier Allegations
Another moment in the deposition involved earlier legal filings connected to the case.
Hornbeck was asked why previous pleadings had denied allegations tied to the arrest.
Her answer was brief:
“I don’t recall.”
In litigation, depositions often revisit earlier filings to clarify the record. When sworn testimony revisits earlier statements, attorneys may compare the answers to prior pleadings and documentation.
For parents who have spent years fighting through family court, that process can feel familiar.
Accusations and filings may define the narrative for years — until a deposition finally asks the question directly.
Relocation and Custody Conflicts
The deposition also revisited disputes about relocation and travel involving the couple’s child.
Hornbeck testified that there was no written or oral agreement regarding relocation to Anne Arundel County in 2015.
She was also asked whether Reichert consented to travel involving the child to Maine in 2016.
“I don’t recall,” she said when asked about consent, though she stated that she believed the child had visited Maine during that period.
Relocation disputes are among the most common sources of conflict in custody battles. When parents disagree about travel, residence, or relocation, those disputes can quickly become the center of years of litigation.
The Memory Question
Throughout the deposition, Hornbeck said she did not recall details about several events connected to the conflict between the parents.
These included:
- custody disputes between 2018 and 2020
- certain interactions with law enforcement
- specific circumstances surrounding earlier allegations.
At one point during the questioning, Reichert’s attorney asked whether there was a reason she could not recall events from the timeframe.
“No,” Hornbeck replied when asked whether she had a memory issue.
Memory gaps are not uncommon in legal testimony, particularly when events occurred years earlier. But for parents who have lived through prolonged custody battles, the contrast between detailed allegations and limited recollection under oath can feel striking.
Why This Matters for Parents
The Reichert case is ultimately about one family.
But it reflects a broader reality that many parents — especially fathers — say they face when navigating the family court system.
Custody disputes can stretch on for years. Allegations can reshape lives overnight. And once narratives take hold in court filings, they can be difficult to challenge.
For many parents, depositions become one of the few moments when those narratives are questioned directly.
The Hornbeck deposition represents one such moment.
The Reichert Files: Under Oath
This article marks the beginning of a new Father & Co. series examining sworn testimony in the Reichert case.
The Under Oath series will analyze depositions and testimony connected to the litigation and compare those statements with court filings and other records.
Upcoming reporting will examine:
- the pattern of “I don’t recall” responses in the deposition
- the timeline surrounding the 2018 arrest
- relocation disputes and custody orders
- and how sworn testimony compares with the broader record.
For parents watching from the outside — especially those who have fought their own battles in family court — the deposition is more than just a legal proceeding.
It is a reminder that the truth in custody disputes is often complicated, contested, and revealed only after years of litigation.
And sometimes, only when the questions are asked under oath.
Keep Father & Co. Free
Father & Co. exists to support parents navigating separation, custody, and systems that are often confusing, isolating, or overwhelming. This work is grounded in lived experience, careful research, and respect for the real stakes families face.
If this article helped you feel less alone, better informed, or more grounded, reader support helps keep these resources free and available to others who need them.
Need help reviewing or organizing court or formal documents?
Father & Co. offers non-legal document review and organization for people representing themselves. This includes clarity, structure, neutral tone, and timeline organization — not legal advice or representation.
Have a story, experience, or resource to share?
Submissions are reviewed with care and discretion. We respect privacy and handle sensitive information responsibly.
Discover more from Fatherand.Co
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
