A mass shooting in Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School has led to outpouring of grief as well as student led protest for gun control. March 27, 2018. Photo: Janos Rautonen/Shutterstock.com.

Attempts by the parents of a student killed in the 2018 Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting to sue shooter Nikolas Cruz's mental health provider deteriorated at the Fourth District Court of Appeal, which ruled Wednesday that the facility owed no legal duty to victims.

"It is difficult to predict any human being's future conduct," the opinion said. "Unlike scientific disciplines firmly grounded in mathematics, psychology is not a precise science, so courts should be cautious about expanding liability beyond the therapist-patient relationship."

Plaintiffs Andrew Pollack and Shara Kaplan sued on behalf of their daughter Meadow Pollack, who died with 16 others in the Valentine's Day attack. They alleged Henderson Behavioral Health Inc. in Lauderdale Lakes should have warned people about Cruz's dangerous behavior and should not have recommended that he transfer from a school for children with behavioral and emotional disorders to public school.

Cruz, who faces the death penalty, is still awaiting trial over the shooting, but the Fourth DCA assumed all allegations against him were true for purposes of the appeal.

The center treated Cruz in sporadic intervals between 2009 and 2016, providing therapy and services for anger issues, and meeting with school officials to discuss his behavior.

Soon after Cruz was suspended from school in 2016, his mother and guidance counselors allegedly called Henderson about aggressive and suicidal behavior. Cruz opted out of therapy after turning 18, according to the opinion, which noted the following year was "a turbulent one" as he was expelled, his mother died and he bought the AR-15 rifle used in the shooting.

But the Fourth DCA found Broward Circuit Judge Patti Englander Henning was right to drop the claims. To find Henderson owed a legal duty to the victims, the ruling said, would "not only undermine effective patient-therapist relationships, but it also would discourage mental health professionals from providing mental health services to students."

The opinion pointed to Florida law, which says mental health providers don't have to warn third parties about potentially dangerous patients because of how unpredictable and subjective mental health cases can be.

'No solace'

Fourth DCA Judge Robert Gross wrote the ruling, which drew a special concurrence from Judge Jonathan Gerber.

Gerber noted that one related law, Florida Statute Section 456.059, was amended after the Parkland shooting to impose a legal duty on psychiatrists to disclose patient communications to law enforcement about "a specific threat to cause serious bodily injury or death to an identified or a readily available person." But Gerber wrote that doesn't mean psychiatrists have to warn any potential victims.

"Thus, despite the tragedy from which this case arises, it would be improper for this court to issue an after-the-fact decision imposing a legal duty and potential liability upon Henderson's inactions in this case," Gerber said. "While this explanation provides no solace to this tragedy's many surviving victims, or the seventeen families who continue to endure indescribable grief, this is the decision which we must render in this case."

Plaintiffs lawyers Joel Perwin, a solo practitioner in Miami, and David Brill and Joseph J. Rinaldi Jr. of Brill & Rinaldi, The Law Firm in Weston, said they were disappointed with the ruling.

"We submit that Henderson manifestly failed the victims of the MSD shootings, including by recommending against all reason and sense that the killer be mainstreamed into MSD, and that Henderson should be held accountable in a court of law by a Broward County jury," Brill said. "However, we appreciate the undeniably serious and thoughtful analyses in which the court engaged, and we respect the court's decision."

Defense counsel Joshua Walker and Eric J. Netcher, of Walker, Revels, Greninger & Netcher in Orlando, deferred comment to Henderson's CEO, Dr. Steven Ronik.

"We appreciate that the court carefully considered the facts of these cases in determining that Henderson did not violate any duty in the mental health services it provided," Ronik said. "Henderson Behavioral Health will continue to remain focused on helping our communities every day."

Read the ruling:

More appeals:

JNC Does Not Have to Release Florida Judge's Federal Application After 11th Circuit Tosses Lawsuit

Florida Ruling Demonstrates Potential Pitfall for Plaintiffs Bringing Medical Malpractice Lawsuits