I’m still confused.
Sovereign immunity holds in attributing blame/guilt/liability to the individual officers. This is logical. The individual officers should not be worried about losing their house and life savings unless the deliberately go far outside the parameters of their job.
The same can be said about the state.
But if the state were immune from lawsuits, it would not insure its vehicles or worry about misbehaviour of its officers.
There rule of thumb I read about is that if the police find evidence, if their presence there is valid, then there is no recourse for damages. Any reasonable damage is in the course of doing their job. If they were, for exapple, to kick in your door, overturn the house and tear all the plasterboard off the walls - and find nothing - then they would be on the hook for damages. Maybe someone in Law Enforcement can corroborate whether this is the case…
I assume the same would apply to a field - if what the police, coroner, etc. did was normal then there should be no recourse. it’s not the state’s fault that someone dumped a body on your land. If they spent too much time driving around all over the field with no effort to minimize damages and excessively wrecking things - well, that’s for a judge or jury to decide if you sue… including the situation whether they over-did their actions so much they went beyond immunity.
Since I don’t know the issues - from what I see, Ruby Ridge settlements have zero to do with property damage, and more to do with punitive damages for excessive (unlawful?) use of force by the government.