There more extreme cases:
>Who Pays When The DEA Destroys Your Vehicle And Kills Your Employee During A Botched Sting? Hint: Not The DEA
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150428/16401530826/who-p...
>Who Pays When The DEA Destroys Your Vehicle And Kills Your Employee During A Botched Sting? Hint: Not The DEA
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150428/16401530826/who-p...
Ah, ignorance of the law. Fine for them, not for you.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.
Luckily he must've gotten a better lawyer, because an appeal was allowed to continue under grounds the DEA violated the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment:
> Because plaintiffs have stated facts sufficient to demonstrate that the government physically deprived them of property for the duration of the controlled drug delivery operation, we hold that plaintiffs have stated a claim for a taking compensable under the Fifth Amendment. We therefore deny defendant’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4467728/patty-v-united...