Sandy Hook Families Plan to Appeal Newtown Immunity Ruling
Donald Papcsy, attorney for the families of victims Jesse Lewis and Noah Pozner, told the Connecticut Law Tribune he believes he has a strong case on appeal, based on exemptions to governmental immunity.
May 08, 2018 at 07:24 PM
4 minute read
The attorney for two families of children killed in the December 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre vowed Tuesday to appeal a Superior Court judge's ruling that found the city and school board were not negligent in their death.
Donald Papcsy, attorney for the families of victims Jesse Lewis and Noah Pozner, told the Connecticut Law Tribune he believes he has a strong case on appeal, based on exemptions to governmental immunity, and that the case is strong enough to appeal to the Connecticut Supreme Court. The courts were expected to decide in the next week which would be the venue to hear the case..
Papcsy's comments follow a 29-page ruling released Tuesday morning, which found the city and school board immune from litigation related to the 2012 mass shooting that left 20 children and six adults dead.
Families of two victims, 6-year-old students Jesse Lewis and Noah Pozner, filed a wrongful death lawsuit in August 2017, alleging safety measures were inadequate to prevent gunman Adam Lanza from making his way through the school's classrooms. It also alleged school officials failed to provide doors that could lock from the inside, and that staff lacked proper training for a lockdown.
The judge's ruling comes as a lawsuit by 10 of the families to hold gunmakers responsible for the Sandy Hook Elementary School is on hold before the Connecticut Supreme Court, pending the outcome of a bankruptcy filing by firearms manufacturer Remington Outdoor Co. Inc.
Superior Court Judge Robin Wilson focused her decision primarily on governmental immunity, which she found granted the town broad discretion.
“On appeal, the court will have a chance to review what we believe are significant issues with the ruling. We believe either the Supreme Court or Appellate Court will agree with us,” Papcsy said. “Our operative complaint fully laid out the foundation that was necessary to overcome the immunity defense alleged in the defendant's summary judgment. And there is no question there are genuine issues of material fact—regarding immunity exceptions of imminent harm and identifiable victim—that a jury absolutely should have been able to consider.”
Papcsy said Wilson's decision ultimately holds that schools “can never be held accountable if they failed to implement protocols intended to keep our children and teachers safe in their public schools.”
“In this case and in cases like it, there are protocols in place specifically for these incidents,” he said. “But what the defense will say is that they do not have to follow them because they are completely discretionary, and if they are not followed, no one can hold them accountable. The judicial system has, to this point, agreed with that premise. But the parents who lost their children in this horrific event strongly disagree.”
Papcsy said officials never ordered a lockdown at anytime during the shooting.
Sandy Hook had an emergency “code blue” protocol in its guidelines, but the judge noted the language in guidelines are discretionary.
But Papcsy is gearing to challenge that notion.
“It's common sense that if you are going to have a lockdown procedure that you should provide keys to the teachers so they can lock the doors,” he said. “We were provided with evidence from different sources that this was not the case. Municipalities should not be able to escape accountability by saying that in a lockdown procedure, actually locking the doors is discretionary and not required.”
In her ruling, Wilson said the school district could never have imagined the massacre that took place 5 and a half years ago, before the term “mass killing” became a part of the federal lawmaking lexicon.
“In a situation so extraordinary and unique, so chaotic and violent, it could not have been apparent that their actions or inactions were likely to subject the students and other faculty to imminent harm,” Wilson wrote.
Attorney Charles Deluca, senior partner at Ryan Ryan Deluca in Stamford, and Monte Frank, a member of Pullman & Comley, represented the city and the Newtown Board of Education.
Frank declined to comment, but Deluca said he “was not surprised” by Wilson's ruling.
“I thought the court issued a very thoughtfully and well-reasoned decision,” he said. “We are pleased the court agreed with the arguments we put forth on behalf of the town and the Board of Education.”
Michael Marciano contributed to this story.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllK&L Gates Files String of Suits Against Electronics Manufacturer's Competitors, Brightness Misrepresentations
3 minute readEleven Attorneys General Say No to 'Unconstitutional' Hijacking of State, Local Law Enforcement
3 minute read'Battle of the Experts': Bridgeport Jury Awards Defense Verdict to Stamford Hospital
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Inside Track: AI Is Sure to Fray Big Law's Devotion to Billable Hour
- 2Evidence Explained: Prevailing Attorney Outlines Successful Defense in Inmate Death Case
- 3The Week in Data Jan. 24: A Look at Legal Industry Trends by the Numbers
- 4The Use of Psychologists as Coaches/Trial Consultants
- 5Could This Be the Era of Client-Centricity?
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250