David Tate v. Timothy R. Derosha

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia grants Virginia State Trooper Timothy R. Derosha’s partial motion to dismiss David Tate’s Fourth Amendment seizure claim under Rule 12(b)(6). The court concludes that Derosha’s conduct did not constitute a show of authority amounting to a seizure and, alternatively, that Derosha was entitled to qualified immunity. Tate’s federal and state speech-retaliation claims proceed.

Holdings

1. Tate did not plausibly allege that Derosha made a show of authority that would have caused a reasonable person in Tate's position to believe he was not free to leave. Because there was no sufficient show of authority and no physical force, Tate did not plausibly allege a seizure.
2. Derosha was entitled to qualified immunity because Tate failed to allege a violation of the Fourth Amendment and, independently, because the alleged right was not clearly established under the circumstances.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Tate plausibly alleged that Derosha made a show of authority that constituted a seizure under the Fourth Amendment.
2. Whether Derosha was entitled to qualified immunity because his alleged conduct did not violate a constitutional right and, alternatively, because the right was not clearly established.

Disposition

dismissed