Gerald Novak; Adam Wenzel v. William L. Federspiel

Bay City, Michigan personal injury lawyers presented the Plaintiff who sued on civil rights violation theories claiming hey own fourteen firearmsseized in a criminal investigation that ended years ago.



Sheriff William Federspiel refused to turn the firearms over to Novak and Wenzel because he contends they have not proven that they own them. So they sued Federspiel under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and under Michigan law, asserting various federal constitutional claims and state constitutional and statutory claims. The district court granted summary judgment to Federspiel on all claims and denied Novak and Wenzel's motion for partial summary judgment. The district court should have allowed Novak and Wenzel to proceed with their: (1) federal takings claims against Federspiel in his official capacity, (2) Second Amendment claims against Federspiel in his official capacity, and (3) state-law claim-and-delivery action.



own them. So they sued Federspiel under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and under Michigan law, asserting various federal constitutional claims and state constitutional and statutory claims. The district court granted summary judgment to Federspiel on all claims and denied Novak and Wenzel's motion for partial summary judgment. The district court should have allowed Novak and Wenzel to proceed with their: (1) federal takings claims against Federspiel in his official capacity, (2) Second Amendment claims against Federspiel in his official capacity, and (3) state-law claim-and-delivery action. We thus affirm in part and vacate in part.



In 2017, the Saginaw County Sheriff's Office seized fourteen firearms in connection with a domestic-violence incident at a cabin in Merrill, Michigan. Officers arrested the perpetrator, Benjamin Heinrich, who admitted that he took one of the firearms from the cabin's bedroom and aimed it at his child's mother to force her out of the house. Heinrich pleaded guilty in state court, completed one year of probation, and was discharged from supervision in January 2019. All fourteen firearms remain in Sheriff William Federspiel's custody at the sheriff's office. Heinrich's uncle, Gerald Novak, apparently owns the cabin where the firearms were stored. He and Adam Wenzel (Heinrich's distant cousin) claim that Novak owns twelve of the firearms and Wenzel owns the other two, and that Federspiel has refused to return them. They admit, however, that they do not have any documents proving their ownership. They also maintain that they had no part in Heinrich's crime. Novak and Wenzel have sought to recover the firearms through two separate state-court

proceedings and the present federal action, which is now on appeal for the third time.



* * *



Federspiel asserts that qualified immunity bars the claims for damages against him in his personal capacity. Qualified immunity shields government officials sued in their personal capacity from liability for civil damages unless: "(1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established at the time.” District of Columbia v. Wesby, 583 U.S. 48, 62–63 (2018) (internal quotation marks omitted). "For a right to be clearly established, the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.” Mercer v. Athens County, 72 F.4th 152, 164 (6th Cir. 2023) (quotation omitted). "[T]he plaintiff has the burden of showing that the defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity.” Mosier v. Evans, 90 F.4th 541, 546 (6th Cir. 2024) (citation omitted).

For these reasons, we AFFIRM the district court’s denial of Novak and Wenzel’s motion for partial summary judgment. We AFFIRM IN PART and VACATE IN PART the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Federspiel. Specifically, we AFFIRM the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Federspiel as to the individual-capacity takings claims, the procedural-due-process claims, the substantive-due process claims, the Fourth Amendment claims, and the inverse-condemnation claims. We VACATE the grant of summary judgment to Federspiel as to the official-capacity and injunctive-relief takings claims, the official-capacity Second Amendment claims, and the claim-and-delivery action, and we REMAND to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.