SWAT Raid Fallout: McKinney Ordered To Compensate Homeowner
A ruling years in the making affirms property rights in a case previously reported by The Dallas Express.
A federal judge has ordered the City of McKinney to pay nearly $60,000 in damages to a woman whose home was destroyed during a 2020 SWAT standoff—despite her having no connection to the fugitive inside.
Vicki Baker, a cancer patient and retired grandmother, was preparing to relocate to Montana when police descended on her property. The SWAT team was pursuing her former handyman, who had barricaded himself inside her McKinney home.
'I told them, 'Please don't destroy my house,'' Baker recalled to NBC 5. They did anyway.
What followed was a five-year legal battle in which the city refused to pay for the $60,000-plus in property damage, forcing Baker to dip into her retirement savings just to make the home livable again.
With the help of the Institute for Justice, Baker took the city to court, arguing that government agents who destroy private property—regardless of motive—should be held financially accountable.
'We're trying to establish that even if the government is acting for a legitimate reason, they must compensate property owners for what they destroy,' said attorney Jeffrey Redfern.
The city previously offered a partial settlement, but Baker refused, pushing for full compensation and a broader legal precedent. Last week, a federal judge agreed and ordered McKinney to pay $59,656.69.
City officials told NBC 5 they are 'evaluating options for appealing the ruling.'
Baker, now retired and living on Social Security, says she fought not just for herself but for others who might one day find themselves in her position.
'It was disastrous for me, but what if it were a single mom with no savings? Someone has to stand up,' she said.
The ruling could signal a growing trend of courts reining in unchecked government immunity when innocent citizens bear the cost of public safety operations.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Supreme Court revives suit from victims of botched FBI raid
Advertisement The couple barricaded themselves in a closet. The agents dragged Cliatt out at gunpoint and handcuffed him. They told Martin to keep her hands up as she pleaded to see her 7-year-old son, who had been asleep in another room. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up As they questioned Cliatt, he gave his address. It was different from the one for the suspected gang hideout the agents had a warrant to enter. One of the agents, Lawrence Guerra, had earlier identified the correct house, which he said looked similar and was nearby, on a different street. But on the morning of the raid, he said he went to the wrong house because he had been misdirected by his GPS device. That could not be confirmed, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the court, as Guerra threw the device away not long after the raid. Gorsuch added that the agents had overlooked plenty of indications they were in the wrong place — a street sign, a house number, and a different car parked in the driveway. Advertisement The couple sued for false arrest, false imprisonment, assault, battery, and other claims but lost in the lower courts on a variety of grounds. Notably, that government officials' actions are protected from lawsuits when they perform a duty that involves discretion. The case turned on the Federal Tort Claims Act, which sometimes allows suits against the government for money notwithstanding the doctrine of sovereign immunity, which ordinarily bars such suits unless the government consents. A 1974 amendment to the law made it easier to sue over wrong-house raids after notorious ones in Collinsville, Ill., but the law is subject to a tangled series of 13 exceptions. 'If federal officers raid the wrong house, causing property damage and assaulting innocent occupants, may the homeowners sue the government for damages?' Gorsuch asked in his opinion. 'The answer is not as obvious as it might be.' The court clarified aspects of the analysis of when such cases are allowed and returned the case to the lower courts for further consideration. In a concurring opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, said 'there is reason to think' that the plaintiffs will ultimately prevail, saying that Congress had amended the law in response to the Collinsville raids to allow cases like this one. Patrick Jaicomo, a lawyer with the Institute for Justice, which represented the plaintiffs, welcomed the ruling. 'The Supreme Court was right to let the Martin family's case move forward for the FBI's botched raid of their home,' he said in a statement. 'The court's decision today acknowledged how far the circuit courts have strayed from the purpose of the Federal Tort Claims Act, which is to ensure remedies to the victims of federal harms.' Advertisement This article originally appeared in
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Experts Issue Urgent Warning After Massive AT&T Data Leak Resurfaces
AT&T customers are being warned to act fast after a trove of stolen data, containing up to 86 million customer records, resurfaced on cybercrime forums this week. According to McAfee security experts, the leak includes personal details that could easily lead to identity theft. The database was originally stolen in a 2024 breach but had not been widely published until now. Researchers say Russian hackers appear to be selling the data on underground forums, and cybercriminals now have access to email addresses, phone numbers, and, most alarmingly, nearly 44 million Social Security numbers. 'If you're an AT&T customer, now's the time to take action,' warned Jasdev Dhaliwal of McAfee. 'This data is already circulating, and it contains everything criminals need to impersonate you—your SSN, name, phone number, and more.' Newsweek reported that cybersecurity expert Steve Weisman echoed that concern, adding that once your Social Security number is out, the best defense is to get an IRS-issued PIN to prevent fraudulent tax filings. AT&T responded by saying this is not a new breach. "After analysis by our internal teams as well as external data consultants, we are confident this is repackaged data previously released on the dark web in March 2024," the company said in a statement. AT&T added that all affected customers had already been notified last year and that law enforcement is involved in the latest development. But with the data making headlines again, and being actively sold, experts urge customers not to assume they're safe. They recommend checking your credit reports, freezing your credit if needed, and updating your AT&T account password. The exposed data could be used in phishing scams, loan fraud, or even to file false tax returns. Bottom line: even if this isn't a brand-new breach, the damage is far from over. And if your identity is part of the leak, ignoring it now could cost you Issue Urgent Warning After Massive AT&T Data Leak Resurfaces first appeared on Men's Journal on Jun 12, 2025
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Iowa restaurant chain paid its servers only tips, U.S. Department of Labor claims
The Mexico Lindo Grill & Cantina at 1857 Lower Muscatine Road in Iowa City is one of three Iowa restaurants accused of wage-and-hour violations by the U.S. Department of Labor. (Photo via Google Earth) A chain of Iowa-based Mexican restaurants is being sued by the federal government for allegedly paying some of its workers only the tips collected from customers. In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, the U.S. Department of Labor is alleging that Rocio Correa-Mata, 33, of Iowa City, as the sole owner and primary manager of the Mexico Lindo Grill & Cantina restaurant chain, violated the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. Mexico Lindo Grill & Cantina has locations in West Branch, Iowa City, and North Liberty. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX The department alleges that certain servers at the restaurants were 'only paid via direct cash and credit tips from customers' and did not receive the federal minimum wage rate of $7.25 per hour. The chain also is alleged to have 'willfully and repeatedly' paid employees less than the statutory overtime rate of 1.5 times the workers' regular wages for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week. In addition, the department claims Mexico Lindo paid its 'back-of-the-house employees' – a term typically used to describe kitchen workers — a cash salary that was insufficient to compensate them for any overtime hours. According to the lawsuit, Mexico Lindo then failed to create and preserve accurate records of employees' hours and failed to document each worker's full name and Social Security number. The department alleges defendant Correa-Mata has actively managed and supervised Mexico Lindo's operations and employees from June 2015 through the present, overseeing the chain's daily operations, hiring and firing employees, establishing work schedules, and setting rates of pay at each location. The Department of Labor is seeking a court order enjoining Correa-Mata and the chain from 'continuing to withhold employees' unpaid minimum wages and overtime compensation,' as well as an order finding them liable for any unpaid wages, plus an equal amount in liquidated damages, payable to 25 different employees of the three Mexico Lindo locations. The Iowa Capital Dispatch was unable to reach Correa-Mata at home or at any of the Mexico Lindo restaurants. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
