A civil suit by the family of a man fatally shot by Atlantic City police officers in 2014 claiming they used unreasonable and excessive force was largely dismissed on summary judgment by a U.S. District Court.

"For the foregoing reasons, Atlantic City's motion for summary judgment will be granted and plaintiffs' claims against Atlantic City will be dismissed with prejudice," wrote U.S. District Judge Renee Marie Bumb of the District of New Jersey on Aug. 30. "Additionally, the officers' motion for summary judgment will be granted in part, and denied in part."

The part of the plaintiffs' complaint moving forward, the judge said, is a claim against Det. Michael Ruzzo and Det. James Herbert related to the moment that the fatal shot was fired against Shawn Brown, who was armed and being pursued by the officers.

Claims against a third officer, Det. Howard Mason, were dismissed because he didn't fire his weapon in the shooting of Brown.

"Additionally, the officers' motion is denied, without prejudice, as it pertains to the state law tort claims (except for those related to failure to render medical assistance, which are dismissed for a failure of proof)," Bumb, sitting in Camden, wrote. "The officers will be permitted 21 days from the date of this opinion to renew their motion regarding the NJTCA issue, with more responsive briefing, accompanied by a copy of the notice of claims."

In their motion for summary judgment, the officers argued that they were entitled to qualified immunity because their actions were objectively reasonable under the circumstances. The officers also argued that plaintiffs' state law tort claims must be dismissed because they were never served with a notice of claims under the New Jersey Tort Claims Act.

"On this issue, the Court finds that the Officers' actions during their pursuit of Brown, including the use of deadly force, were objectively reasonable from the moment the pursuit began, until Brown fell to the ground and dropped his gun," wrote Bumb.

"However, the Court finds that genuine issues of material fact preclude summary judgment as to whether it was objectively reasonable for Det. Herbert and Det. Ruzzo to use deadly force after Brown had fallen to the ground and dropped his weapon."

Andaiye Al-Ugdah, a solo practitioner in Mount Laurel and counsel for the estate of Shawn Brown, was not immediately available for comment.

Susan K. O'Connor of Hoagland, Longo, Moran, Dunst & Doukas in New Brunswick, counsel for defendant City of Atlantic City, could not be reached.

George Saponaro of Sapanaro Law Group in Mount Holly, represents the detectives. The firm could not be reached by email.

According to the decision, Dets. Herbert, Mason, and Ruzzo were on duty in Atlantic City in plain clothes after an undercover drug purchase when they came upon shots being fired nearby in the parking lot of the Cedar Food Market on Sept. 9, 2014.

A confidential informant identified the shooter as Shawn Brown to the officers, and ballistics tests later confirmed that the shots fired near the market came from Shawn Brown's handgun, the decision said.

Brown began to flee down a nearby side street, according to court documents, and produced a handgun. The officers, who were wearing badges around their necks, repeatedly identified themselves as police and ordered Brown to stop, but a pursuit of Brown ensued by the officers in their vehicle.

At that point, Brown turned to face the officers with his gun pointed in their direction. In response, Det. Ruzzo fired at Brown, as did Herbert. The pursuit continued, with one of the detectives observing blood on Brown's shirt, and Ruzzo fired again at Brown before Brown fell to the ground and dropped his gun, the court said, noting that it was later determined that Brown was struck three times by bullets.

Accounts differed as to who fired first. And the suit included claims that the three officers did not administer any medical assistance, such as CPR, to Brown at the scene. Brown arrived at AtlantiCare Regional Medical Center and was pronounced dead about an hour after his arrival, Bumb said, noting that there was no evidence to suggest that Brown would have survived if he had received different or faster medical care.

An autopsy determined that one of the shots from either Ruzzo or Herbert was fatal. The Atlantic County Prosecutor's Office investigated and presented findings to a grand jury. Ruzzo and Herbert weren't criminally charged. Police internal affairs also investigated and concluded that the detectives' use of deadly force was legal, proper, and justified, and that neither Herbert nor Ruzzo violated any rules, regulations, policies, or procedures, the court said.

The family's civil suit claimed constitutional violations, failure to render timely and proper medical assistance, wrongful death, conspiracy, and other counts. It sought $10 million in damages and other relief.

Claims against the Atlantic City Police Department were previously dismissed.

Bumb in her Aug. 30 opinion said she was required to "assess whether the officer 'made a reasonable mistake as to what the law requires,'" and if "'the officer's mistake … is reasonable, [then] the officer is entitled to the immunity defense.'"

Wrote Bumb: "The facts in the record support a finding that the officers' initial pursuit of Brown, along with the use of deadly force, were objectively reasonable until the moment Brown first fell to the sidewalk."

The judge said Brown had posed as a legitimate threat to the officers during their pursuit of him by vehicle. "On this issue, plaintiffs have failed to point to any evidence in the record to refute the officers' reports that during the pursuit, Brown removed the gun from his waistband and turned it towards the officers," and "it was reasonable for the Det. Ruzzo and Det. Herbert to use deadly force until the threat had been neutralized. To that end, the use of deadly force was objectively reasonable," Bumb wrote.

"Although this Court finds that the officers' initial use of deadly force was objectively reasonably, genuine issues of material fact prevent this Court from determining the reasonableness of the final shots fired by Det. Ruzzo and Det. Herbert," she added.

"Notably, the Third Circuit has held that '[e]ven where an officer is initially justified in using force, he may not continue to use such force after it has become evident that the threat justifying the force has vanished,'" added Bumb.