A federal judge says Broward schools and the Sheriff’s Office had no legal duty to protect students during the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. 
 
 U.S. District Judge Beth Bloom dismissed a suit filed by 15 students who claimed they were traumatized by the crisis in February. The suit named six defendants, including the Broward school district and the Broward Sheriff’s Office, as well as school deputy Scot Peterson and campus monitor Andrew Medina. 
 
 Bloom ruled that the two agencies had no constitutional duty to protect students who were not in custody. 
 
 “The claim arises from the actions of [shooter Nikolas] Cruz, a third party, and not a state actor,” she wrote in a ruling Dec. 12. “Thus, the critical question the Court analyzes is whether defendants had a constitutional duty to protect plaintiffs from the actions of Cruz. 
 
 “As previously stated, for such a duty to exist on the part of defendants, plaintiffs would have to be considered to be in custody” — for example, as prisoners or patients of a mental hospital, she wrote. 
 
 Peterson was the only armed person at the school when Cruz showed up with an assault rifle and murdered 17 people, in addition to wounding 17 more. Peterson has been widely vilified for taking refuge outside the school and not confronting Cruz. 
 
 “His arbitrary and conscience-shocking actions and inactions directly and predictably caused children to die, get injured, and get traumatized,” the lawsuit claimed. 
 
 Medina knew Cruz and saw him arrive on campus, but did not confront him. 
 
 The lawsuit argued that the Sheriff’s Office and School Board “either have a policy that allows killers to walk through a school killing people without being stopped. Alternatively, they have such inadequate training that the individuals tasked with carrying out the polices … lack the basic fundamental understandings of what those policies are such that they are incapable of carrying them out.” 
 
 Kristoffer R. Budhram of Jacksonville, who represented the students, said in an emailed statement: “We respectfully disagree with Judge Bloom's decision to dismiss our clients' case. This case is about protecting the Constitutional rights of individuals who were the victims of one of the worst mass shootings in this country’s history. 
 
 “We are exploring all of our options for ensuring that they get their day in court, including appealing Judge Bloom's decision," Budhram wrote. 
 
 Bloom’s ruling contrasts with the action of a Broward County judge last week. 
 
 In that case, Peterson’s lawyer sought to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the family of Meadow Pollack, one of 17 people killed in the shooting. Broward Circuit Judge Patti Englander Henning rejected his argument that Peterson had “no legal duty” to protect the students and faculty. 
 
 Englander Henning found that Peterson had a duty to the school community as someone whose job was security and who had an “obligation to act reasonably” under the circumstances of the shooting. 
 
 The judge also found Peterson was not protected from the lawsuit by “sovereign immunity,” a legal doctrine that shields public employees from legal action based on their official conduct. 
 
 Joel Perwin, Pollack’s attorney, said: “We don’t think it's even debatable that Peterson had a duty to these students. Peterson’s disclaimer of any legal responsibility is a mirror of his abdication of his responsibility for these kids,” he said. 
 
 Peterson’s lawyer, Michael Piper, said he would appeal the ruling. 
 
 lhuriash@sunsentinel.com, 954-572-2008 or Twitter @LisaHuriash 

 The sheriff's office, the county and others were let go - except for former resource officer Scot Peterson, who has come under fire for his actions during the February 14th shooting. 
 
 What to Know The judge did allow a portion of the suit to go forward against former school resource deputy Scot Peterson -- though not for actions taken. 
 
 A federal judge last Wednesday dismissed Broward School and Sheriff's officials, as well as Broward County itself, from a lawsuit filed by 15 students who say the Feb. 14 attack at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland caused them psychological injury and severe trauma. 
 
 But the judge did allow a portion of the suit to go forward against former school resource deputy Scot Peterson - though not for actions taken or not taken in connection to the attack. 
 
 The lawsuit, filed in July by the 15 survivors, named as defendants Peterson, now-resigned Capt. Jan Jordan, Sheriff Scott Israel, as well as Broward Schools superintendent Robert Runcie, now-dismissed school monitor Andrew Medina and Broward County government. 
 
 They claimed their civil and due process rights were violated by the defendants' failure to protect them from school shooters. 
 
 Commission on MSD Shooting Criticizes School System, BSO 
 
 The state commission investigating what led to the massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and how law enforcement responded is criticizing both the school system and the sheriff’s office. NBC 6's Tony Pipitone reports. (Published Wednesday, Dec. 12, 2018) 
 
 But U.S. District Judge Beth Bloom said the complaint failed to allege any of the defendants' "acts or omissions were arbitrary or conscience-shocking” -- the relatively high bar such a complaint must rise above before it can go forward. The allegations are more closely related to a claim of "deliberate indifference," she said, but -- even if that claim were proven -- that “is insufficient to constitute a due-process violation” in this situation. 
 
 "Viewed properly, the claim arises from the actions of (the killer), a third party, and not a state actor," the judge wrote, dismissing all claims of constitutional rights violations related to the shooting itself. 
 
 She did allow one narrow portion of the lawsuit against Peterson to go forward. A student who was detained and searched as part of a drug sale investigation occurring the morning of the shooting claims his rights were violated when Peterson took $200 from him with reasonable suspicion that he was dealing drugs. 
 
 Judge Refuses to Dismiss Negligence Suit Against Deputy in Parkland Shooting 
 
 A judge has rejected a deputy's claim that he had no duty to confront the gunman during the school shooting in Parkland. NBC 6's Steve Litz reports. (Published Wednesday, Dec. 12, 2018) 
 
 The money was returned after the student's mother confirmed to Peterson what the student claimed - that it was money to take his girlfriend to dinner for Valentine's Day. 
 
 "As alleged, the basis for Peterson's search was not reasonable," the judge wrote, adding she could not dismiss that claim at this early stage of the litigation. 
 
 The dismissal does not involve any of several lawsuits filed in state court by the parents of students who were killed. 
 
 Broward Schools Examines Code Red Safety Procedures 
 
 Since the Parkland shooting, the Broward County School Board has been working to figure out what went wrong. NBC 6's Ari Odzer reports. (Published Tuesday, Dec. 11, 2018) 
 
 Nor does it give the plaintiffs an opportunity to fix the lawsuit to where it could withstand another motion to dismiss, the judge ruled, saying "further amendment of these claims would be futile."
– A federal judge has tossed a lawsuit claiming sheriff's deputies and school officials failed to protect students during the Feb. 14 Parkland shooting. Claiming severe trauma and psychological injuries, 15 students of Florida's Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School argued their civil and due process rights were violated. "Viewed properly, the claim arises from the actions of [shooter Nikolas Cruz], a third party, and not a state actor," US District Judge Beth Bloom wrote in a Dec. 12 ruling, per NBC Miami, clearing Broward's school district and sheriff's office of any legal duty to protect students not in custody. At best, the lawsuit filed in July alleged "deliberate indifference" on the part of defendants—including campus monitor Andrew Medina and school deputy Scot Peterson—which is "insufficient to constitute a due-process violation," Bloom said. While the judge noted "further amendment of these claims would be futile," she did allow a small portion of the suit, alleging a wrongful search by Peterson on the morning of the shooting, to move forward. A student claimed Peterson took $200 from him, suspecting the money to have come from a drug deal, when it was to be used to pay for a Valentine's dinner date, reportedly confirmed by the student's mother. "As alleged, the basis for Peterson's search was not reasonable," Bloom wrote. Peterson could still be on the hook in another suit brought by the family of shooting victim Meadow Pollack. A Broward Circuit judge last week rejected Peterson's argument that he had "no legal duty" to protect students and faculty at the school, per the Orlando Sentinel. Several lawsuits filed by parents of Parkland students remain in state court. (Peterson described "seven chaotic minutes.")