INGO's search function appears Tango Uniform, but I don't think this appears in another thread yet:
201914414.pdf (uscourts.gov)
The opinion also includes the choice bit of gossip that Scot Peterson nicknamed "Rod," for "Retired On Duty."
Having read most of the opinion now, it doesn't sound like the students' case was very well lawyered.
201914414.pdf (uscourts.gov)
Emphasis added.Appeal from the United States District Courtfor the Southern District of Florida_______________________(December 11, 2020)
Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, HULL and MARCUS, Circuit Judges.WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge:This appeal requires us to decide whether the district court erred when itdismissed a civil-rights action filed by students present at the Parkland schoolUSCA11 Case: 19-14414 Date Filed: 12/11/2020 Page: 1 of 172shooting. The students sued Broward County and five public officials on the theorythat their response to the school shooting was so incompetent that it violated thestudents’ substantive rights under the Due Process Clause of the FourteenthAmendment to the Constitution. The district court dismissed this claim withprejudice because it was an impermissible shotgun pleading and, in the alternative,because it failed to state a claim and leave to amend it would be futile. On themerits, the district court reasoned that because the students were not in a custodialrelationship with the officials and failed to allege conduct by the officials that is“arbitrary” or “shocks the conscience,” the students could not maintain a claim thatthe officials violated their substantive right to due process of law. The studentsappeal this decision, but settled caselaw makes clear that official acts of negligenceor even incompetence in this setting do not violate the right to due process of law.Because we agree with the district court that the students failed to state a claim of aconstitutional violation and that leave to amend would be futile, we affirm.
The opinion also includes the choice bit of gossip that Scot Peterson nicknamed "Rod," for "Retired On Duty."
Having read most of the opinion now, it doesn't sound like the students' case was very well lawyered.
Last edited: