Reardon Files Objections to Magistrate’s Recommendation in Galveston Federal Civil Rights Suit

By Don Matthews

Journalist Matthew Reardon has filed formal objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation in his federal civil rights lawsuit against Galveston officials, setting up a critical ruling by U.S. District Judge Jeffrey V. Brown in Reardon v. Osteen, et al., Civil Action No. 3:25-CV-00203.

The objections, filed pro se on July 28, 2026 — exactly fourteen days after Magistrate Judge Andrew M. Edison’s July 14 Memorandum Opinion, Order, and Recommendation — respond to a mixed ruling that both validated and undercut Reardon’s core claims.

Notably, the magistrate’s own recommendation found that Reardon stated a viable Fourth Amendment claim for the unreasonable seizure of his vehicle, rejecting the “community caretaking” justification officers relied on because the vehicle was not disabled, illegally parked, or unregistered, and because willing private custodians were present at the scene. Despite that finding, the R&R recommended qualified immunity for Officers Doraty and Osteen — a recommendation Reardon’s objections argue rested on a pleading gap rather than a considered ruling on the law, and which he now contests directly by invoking the U.S. Supreme Court’s “obviousness” doctrine from Hope v. Pelzer.

The filing also asks the court to formally preserve two findings for the record regardless of how the underlying claims are resolved: the magistrate’s own observation that “the record shows that Osteen lied to Judge Tollison,” and the defense’s own concession, made in a June 2026 reply brief, that Officer Osteen stated on camera he could not smell alcohol — directly contradicting the “moderate odor of alcohol” language in the blood-warrant affidavit that helped hold Reardon on $100,000 bond for nearly a year. Reardon has requested a Franks hearing to test the materiality of that discrepancy.

Reardon conceded dismissal, with leave to amend, of his First Amendment retaliation and excessive force claims, and the claims against Officer Doraty individually — pleading gaps he says he can cure with additional factual detail. He confirmed that new claims arising from a second vehicle seizure in June 2026 will be filed as a separate lawsuit rather than folded into this case.

Defendants now have their own window to respond before Judge Brown rules on the objections.

Read the Filed Objections

The full, file-stamped copy of the Objections as filed with the Clerk of Court on July 28, 2026 is embedded below.

Open the PDF in a new tab if it does not display above.