Repeater
Regular Member
Absolutely not as to the state - ABC is a state agency, the claim is not negligence (as to which the Tort Claims Act would apply), but intentional torts. So ABC is covered by sovereign immunity.
As to the specific agents, they're going to get the benefit of "qualified immunity" if they were on duty and can make any kind of argument at all that they were motivated by "probable cause". No question their actions were way over the top, and they should probably be screened for mental health disorders - I'd say a TDO would be appropriate - but they're probably not civilly liable.
I would like to think the case could advance at least as far as discovery.
"Qualified Immunity" here in the Fourth Circuit has been quite organic, constantly evolving (see e.g., Bellotte v. Edwards). This could get interesting.