Brown v. Belt, 2:15-cv-11549

Background

Plaintiff Dan Brown, a certified disabled individual, alleges multiple DUI stops and arrests (2013–2016) during which officers failed to provide ADA accommodations, administered standard field sobriety tests despite his disabilities, and recorded breath tests showing 0.0 BAC; several criminal charges were later dismissed.
Brown originally sued Clay County deputies and the County Commission (filed July 27, 2015); he later sought and received leave to amend (motion filed Sept. 15, 2016; court granted Mar. 30, 2018) to add state troopers Trooper McFeeley, Trooper Demaske, and Colonel C.R. “Jay” Smithers.
State Defendants moved to dismiss raising statute-of-limitations and failure-to-state claims; plaintiff eventually responded.
The court treated the amended complaint as filed as of Sept. 15, 2016 for limitations purposes and applied West Virginia limitation periods (generally two years for ADA/§1983 claims, one year for wrongful arrest).
The court denied the statute-of-limitations defense for the claims at issue (claims fell within the applicable periods when the amendment filing date is used), but dismissed specific counts arising from the July 23, 2016 arrest: Count 10 (wrongful arrest), Count 15 (§1983 retaliation), Count 16 (IIED to the extent based on that arrest), and dismissed Count 5 to the extent brought under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether claims against State Defs are time-barred	Brown argued amendment tolled/related back and effectively was filed within limitations (and asked for tolling until criminal charges resolved)	Smithers & McFeeley argued many claims were filed after applicable statutes ran	Court deemed amended complaint filed Sept. 15, 2016; statute-of-limitations defense denied — claims timely.
Whether Count 10 (wrongful arrest on July 23, 2016) states a claim	Brown alleges arrest was retaliatory and officer disbelieved him	McFeeley argued probable cause existed and plaintiff failed to plead illegality	Dismissed: plaintiff pleaded only conclusory retaliation and did not allege lack of probable cause; magistrate found probable cause.
Whether Count 15 (§1983 retaliation for July 23, 2016 arrest) states a claim	Brown claims arrest retaliatory for filing original suit	State Defs argued lack of factual allegations showing McFeeley knew of the prior suit or causal connection; supervisory liability insufficient	Dismissed: plaintiff failed to plead McFeeley’s awareness or causal link; supervisory claim against Smithers fails without underlying predicate.
Whether Count 16 (IIED based on July 23, 2016 arrest) states a claim	Brown contends arrest and conduct caused severe emotional distress	State Defs argued conduct was not outrageous as required under WV law	Dismissed as to claims arising from July 23, 2016 arrest: allegations insufficient to show conduct "atrocious or intolerable."

Key Cases Cited

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (pleading must state a plausible claim)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (each defendant must be alleged to have engaged in constitutional violation; conclusory allegations insufficient)
Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (use-of-force/substantive-due-process claims analyzed under specific amendments)
Will v. Michigan Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 (state and officials sued in official capacity are not "persons" under § 1983)
U.S. v. Watson, 423 U.S. 411 (officer may arrest without warrant when probable cause to believe felony committed)
Semenova v. Md. Transit Admin., 845 F.3d 564 (Fourth Circuit guidance on borrowing state limitations for ADA/Rehab Act claims)
Martin v. Duffy, 858 F.3d 239 (elements for § 1983 retaliation claim)
Constantine v. Rectors & Visitors of George Mason Univ., 411 F.3d 474 (retaliation: protected activity, adverse action, causation)
Angles v. Dollar Tree Stores, Inc., [citation="494 F. App'x 326"] (amended-complaint timing: filing motion to amend before limitations can preserve claim)