CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
DENNIS O’CONNOR, and all those similarly situated,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
RACHAEL EUBANKS, in her personal capacity; TERRY STANTON, in his personal capacity; STATE OF MICHIGAN,
Defendants-Appellees.
   No. 22-1780
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Bay City.
No. 1:21-cv-12837—Nancy G. Edmunds, District Judge.
Decided and Filed: October 6, 2023
Before: MOORE, THAPAR, and NALBANDIAN, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

PER CURIAM. When Michigan took custody of Dennis O’Connor’s property under its unclaimed property laws, it did not acquire title outright. As a result, O’Connor retained certain rights, including those to just compensation and pre-deprivation process. But once O’Connor filed for compensation, a dispute over these rights arose. Michigan reimbursed O’Connor for the original value of his property, but not for any net interest earned after its liquidation. And according to O’Connor, Michigan failed to provide him with pre-deprivation process. So, he sued the State and two officials in their personal capacities, alleging violations of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The district court dismissed O’Connor’s case with prejudice, holding that the employees were entitled to qualified immunity and the State was entitled to sovereign immunity.

As to O’Connor’s claims against the officials, we affirm in part and vacate in part. The officials are entitled to qualified immunity on O’Connor’s taking claims but not his due process claims. And while the district court correctly dismissed O’Connor’s claims against the State, it should not have dismissed them with prejudice.