This case is a classic Federal Tort Claims Act lawsuit, not to mention like any lawsuit, it should be done pasta-making style - throw everyone (hotel, FBI, individual FBI employees, etc) up against the wall and see who sticks.

​​​​​​Yes I am aware of the Federal Torts Claims Act. Of course, that statute does not authorize lawsuits against individual FBI employees or the hotel. Nor does it authorize "civil rights" claims. It would authorize a Massachusetts wrongful imprisonment/assault/battery claim, assuming the federal government doesnt win on an argument that the actors here didnt fit within the law-enforcement exception.
"Civil rights" claims would have to be brought against the individual actors pursuant to Bivens--which is difficult.
As for claims against the hotel, I am not so certain the theory of liability here - that a hotel that "lets" a guest do something there is responsible for everything that results- is so clear (matter of state law). Moreover, there may be a contractual indemnity provision.

I certainly agree he has been grievously wronged, but I do not think he will so certainly be walking away with the kind of money suggested here.

(An 8 figure settlement is extremely rare in multiple death cases. The notion that the small hotel here would settle for that much is...dubious.)

Also factoring in, this was a DoD excerise, with FBI assisting. Add in military and complexity goes up.

The hotel wouldn’t be whipping out its checkbook that fast. The hotel’s insurance company will be the guiding force and have them holding back on doing that.

Unfortunately, suing the federal government successfully is an uphill battle. Perhaps the hotel/hotel’s insurance company will sue the federal government.

Normally I would agree. In this case, the feds will offer a settlement quickly, as they want as little press as they can get on the FBI assisting DoD on a "training exercise."

Unless the hotel had some type of prior knowledge, just not sure how they'll be found liable.

Not sure what you’re taking issue with in my post:

1. The hotel wouldn’t be whipping out its checkbook that fast. The hotel’s insurance company will be the guiding force and have them holding back on doing that.

Or

2. Unfortunately, suing the federal government successfully is an uphill battle. Perhaps the hotel/hotel’s insurance company will sue the federal government.

But to address your comment:

1. Prior knowledge by the hotel that a guest could be or would be at risk of being wrongly roughed up is not necessary for the hotel to be exposed to civil liability.

2. If this went sort of the way it’s gone with some other training events for a differentpart of the government, the hotel and its employees may have — through their negligence — even contributed to the incident.

I agree that the DOJ will be offering a settlement to make it go away, but I’m not sure as much that it’s because of the DOD “training” like this domestically or because it’s the FBI that has become differently (un)popular in the last several years. The more desperate the government is to try to make this go away and not have the pilot do the lecture and conference/media circuit/circus, the more money the involved DL employees will be able to extract earlier on from the government.

Im not sure what the theory of civil liability being advanced against the hotel here is, but there's no strict liability for a hotel for everything that happens within its walls.

This. ^

It depends what the hotel knew, and how they assisted. There's no clear cut liability on part of hotel. If they had no prior knowledge and FBI/DOD came in and told them we need key for room X, yes they could be despite no knowledge. If on other extreme they came in, they said what room is X in, hotel said X and they went to wrong room, no liability.

All I'm saying is it is not a clear cut case that hotel pays anything. Some hear thing hotel is liable just because it happened at hotel.