In 2012, having spent $180,000 defending himself against three separate state actions, Frost sued the attorney general, the state Banking Department and several state employees of both departments, claiming the state retroactively applied a new law, lied in court, conducted an illegal search and overlooked the reasons for the initial complaint that triggered the investigation.Reasonable? There was NOTHING reasonable about what occurred to this man.
Frost also claimed violation of his Constitutional rights against unreasonable search and seizure, and brought negligent supervision claims against several state officials and agencies.
All of those claims were dismissed in Superior Court under the doctrine of “official immunity,” which placed a heavy burden of proof on Frost.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld that ruling, quoting a precedent which stated, “This exacting standard gives government officials breathing room to make reasonable but mistaken judgments by protecting all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.”
The partial good news is the legislature is pushing a law through to reimburse Mr. Frost the money due him. What really needs to happen is make the agency bosses responsible for what happened.