Atlanta family returns FBI wrong-house raid lawsuit to court after Supreme Court ruling revived claims

Case returns to federal appeals court after unanimous Supreme Court decision

An Atlanta-area family whose home was mistakenly raided by an FBI SWAT team is pressing forward with a long-running lawsuit after a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court ruling revived key parts of their case. The dispute stems from a predawn raid in October 2017 in which agents entered the wrong residence while attempting to execute a search warrant tied to a separate target location.

The homeowners, Curtrina Martin and Hilliard “Toi” Cliatt, alleged that the agents broke down their front door, deployed a flash-bang grenade, and held them at gunpoint. Martin’s minor child was also inside the home. The agents soon realized the address error, ended the operation at that location, and redirected to the intended site.

What the Supreme Court decided — and what it did not

On June 12, 2025, the Supreme Court vacated a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit that had blocked the family’s damages claims against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). The Court rejected a broad approach that had allowed the government to argue it was immune from state-law tort liability whenever agents’ conduct had a sufficient connection to federal policy and otherwise complied with federal law.

At the same time, the Supreme Court did not award damages or declare the government liable. Instead, it sent the case back to the Eleventh Circuit for additional proceedings, leaving open whether other FTCA limitations could still bar some or all claims.

The legal framework: FTCA, law-enforcement proviso, and the discretionary-function exception

The FTCA is a statute that permits lawsuits against the United States for certain wrongful acts by federal employees, using state tort law as the baseline for liability in many circumstances. The statute also includes multiple exceptions that can preserve government immunity. Central to this case are:

• the FTCA’s law-enforcement proviso, which allows certain intentional-tort claims (including allegations such as assault, battery, false imprisonment, and false arrest) against the United States arising from acts of federal law enforcement officers; and
• the discretionary-function exception, which can bar claims based on governmental actions involving protected discretionary judgments grounded in policy considerations.

With the case returned to the Eleventh Circuit, the appellate court is expected to reassess how these FTCA provisions apply to the facts of the 2017 wrong-address raid, including whether the challenged conduct falls within or outside the discretionary-function exception.

Procedural history and what comes next

The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Georgia in 2019. In 2022, the case was significantly narrowed, and the Eleventh Circuit later issued a decision that limited the family’s path to recovery. The Supreme Court’s 2025 ruling reopened the litigation trajectory, sending the matter back for further appellate review rather than ending it.

The renewed proceedings will determine whether the family’s claims can proceed under the FTCA and, if so, which claims may be tried and under what state-law standards.

No timetable has been set in the Supreme Court ruling itself for the next decision. The case now returns to the Eleventh Circuit, where further briefing and rulings will shape whether the family’s claims advance toward trial or are again curtailed under remaining FTCA defenses.