851 S.E.2d 789
W. Va.2020Background
- Plaintiff Cody Ryan Fields alleges that Deputy Ross Mellinger struck him in the face with the butt of a shotgun while Fields was compliant in a detached garage during execution of a search warrant, causing severe facial injuries; criminal charges were later dismissed.
- Fields sued in federal court asserting federal §1983 claims and state-law claims including a constitutional tort alleging violation of Article III, §6 (unreasonable searches and seizures) of the West Virginia Constitution seeking monetary damages.
- Defendants moved to dismiss the state constitutional damages claim; the federal district court certified the question whether West Virginia recognizes a private right of action for monetary damages under Article III, §6.
- The West Virginia Supreme Court exercised de novo review of the certified question and analyzed state precedent, federal Bivens jurisprudence, and the availability of alternative remedies.
- The Court found no textual or precedent-based basis in the West Virginia Constitution for an implied monetary-damages cause of action under Article III, §6 and emphasized that alternative remedies (state tort claims and federal §1983) exist.
- Holding: West Virginia does not recognize a private right of action for monetary damages for violations of Article III, §6 of the West Virginia Constitution.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether WV recognizes a private cause of action for monetary damages for violations of Article III, §6 (unreasonable searches & seizures) | Fields: an implied damages remedy should be available under the state constitution (analogous to Bivens and prior WV cases) | Defendants: the constitution contains no express remedy; West Virginia precedent and the existence of other remedies counsel against implying a damages action | Court: No — West Virginia does not recognize a private right to monetary damages under Article III, §6 |
Key Cases Cited
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (recognizing an implied federal damages remedy for Fourth Amendment violations by federal agents)
- Ziglar v. Abbasi, 137 S. Ct. 1843 (2017) (restricting expansion of Bivens and emphasizing caution in implying new constitutional damages remedies)
- Wilkie v. Robbins, 551 U.S. 537 (2007) (articulating two-step inquiry for implying Bivens-type remedies, focusing on alternative remedies and special factors)
- Correctional Servs. Corp. v. Malesko, 534 U.S. 61 (2001) (refusing to extend Bivens to new contexts)
- Harrah v. Leverette, 165 W. Va. 665, 271 S.E.2d 322 (1980) (identifying remedies for prisoner abuse but not creating an implied state-constitutional damages cause of action)
- Hutchison v. City of Huntington, 198 W. Va. 139, 479 S.E.2d 649 (1996) (recognizing a private cause of action for due process violations under Article III, §10 — court declined to extend this holding to §6)
- Fox v. Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co., 34 W. Va. 466, 12 S.E. 757 (1890) (discussing damages for constitutional property guarantees where compensation is part of the constitutional text)
- Johnson v. City of Parkersburg, 16 W. Va. 402 (1880) (explaining courts may supply common-law remedies when constitution forbids injury to property and no statutory remedy exists)