Reardon Files Objections to Magistrate’s Recommendation in Galveston Federal Civil Rights Suit
Formal objections filed July 28, 2026 challenge parts of the magistrate judge’s recommendation in Reardon v. Osteen while asking the district court to preserve key findings about the vehicle seizure and Officer Osteen’s testimony.
Originally published by Don Matthews on We The People News on July 30, 2026.
Formal objections were filed on July 28, 2026 to Magistrate Judge Andrew M. Edison’s recommendation in Reardon v. Osteen, Civil Action No. 3:25-CV-00203. The filing asked U.S. District Judge Jeffrey V. Brown to review the disputed portions of the recommendation before entering final judgment.
The magistrate had found that the complaint stated a viable Fourth Amendment claim over the vehicle seizure, while nevertheless recommending qualified immunity for Officers Doraty and Osteen. The objections challenged that immunity recommendation and asked the court to address the issue under Supreme Court precedent concerning obvious constitutional violations.
The objections also asked the court to preserve the magistrate’s statement that “the record shows that Osteen lied to Judge Tollison,” and to address the defense’s concession that Osteen had said on camera he could not smell alcohol. Those points were tied to the “moderate odor of alcohol” language used in the blood-warrant affidavit.
Other claims, including First Amendment retaliation and excessive force, were conceded for dismissal with leave to amend rather than defended as adequately pleaded in their existing form. Claims concerning a later vehicle seizure were reserved for separate litigation.