[DeusExMachina05]

But unless you can actually sue the offenders or make them pay somehow, the money award from the state, although welcome..seems to be a phyrric victory at best.

[Don Carlos]

If Joe sues the state of Ohio and the offending parties, the employees (in my experience) would be personally liable. The state would then have little choice but to take serious action to protect themself.

Take it to the bank, what those employees did looking into Joe's files was against state law! My guess would be, unless they have a memo from their supervisor requesting the inquiries, they are in deep doo-doo.

Sure wish a state legal beagle would chime in here.

[antiRepublicrat]

But unless you can actually sue the offenders or make them pay somehow, the money award from the state, although welcome..seems to be a phyrric victory at best.

This is just a generality of what I know about immunity, but I believe you are only immune for what you do for the government in the course of your government work, according to government policy. Making these checks was outside of government work and policy, that claim bolsterd by the judgment that the checks were improper, so they might not be immune. Joe could sue the state for having a system that allowed it to happen, but he may be able to sue these people individually for doing it.