Level of negligence determines lawsuits’ feasibility

Local attorneys say the level of negligence or recklessness involved in Saturday’s false alarm will determine whether people can successfully sue the state.

Michael Green says “without question” people will be able to sue.

“It was absolutely negligent. It was outrageous,” he said.

But he said people might not be able to sue the state for punitive damages.

Public officials enjoy qualified immunity from damages for civil liability as long as they did not violate an individual’s clearly established legal or constitutional rights.

Victor Bakke said it has to be reckless or gross negligence, not simple negligence.

He said officials have qualified immunity as long as their actions were not outside the scope and normal course of their jobs. If people are able to overcome a public official’s qualified immunity, they then have to prove that they suffered injury and that the injury was the result of the false alarm.

“Unless somebody was injured or killed, I don’t see anybody claiming pain and suffering for the 38 minutes the state took to inform the public that Saturday morning’s alert was a false alarm,” Bakke said.

Bakke said even if people want to sue, “I don’t see any lawyers taking that case.”

Eric Seitz said the action that caused the false alarm had to have been done “deliberately or maliciously.” He said because warning the public of imminent harm is a state responsibility, “the state has all kinds of immunity.”

He said he doubts there will be any lawsuits against the state for the false alarm.