(Reuters) - The families of some of the 26 children and educators killed at a Connecticut elementary school in 2012 asked the state’s top court on Tuesday to overturn a lower court’s dismissal of their lawsuit against the maker of the gun used in the massacre.

A Connecticut Superior Court judge last month dismissed the 2014 lawsuit against Remington Arms, the North Carolina-based maker of the Bushmaster AR-15-style assault weapon used in the attack on Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.

She ruled that the 2005 federal law known as the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act protected Remington from being sued when its products are used in an illegal manner. The families had argued that the gun never should have been sold because, they said, it had no legitimate civilian purpose.

The gun had been bought legally by the mother of 20-year-old gunman Adam Lanza, whom he shot dead in their Newtown home before his rampage. He ended it by turning the weapon on himself when he heard the sirens of approaching police.

The appeal focuses on the common law principle of “negligent entrustment” to make the case that the weapon should not have been sold to Nancy Lanza, said Josh Koskoff, an attorney for the families. The lawsuit seeks unspecified monetary damages.

“Nothing will ever bring back my son,” said Nicole Hockley, whose son, Dylan, was among the 20 6- and 7-year-olds killed in the Dec. 14, 2012, attack. “Our only goal in bringing this appeal is to help prevent the next Sandy Hook from happening.”

Remington officials did not immediately respond to a call seeking comment.

So-called assault rifles like the Bushmaster have been used in several recent mass shootings in the United States. They include the attack on a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida, in June that took 49 lives and was the deadliest shooting in U.S. history.

The AR-15 was developed from the U.S. military’s M-16 rifle, used in the Vietnam War in the 1960s. Unlike the military version, the AR-15 is not fully automatic, meaning users must pull the trigger each time they want to fire a shot.</s>The families of victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting massacre are appealing their lawsuit against gun companies to the state Supreme Court.

Families of nine Sandy Hook victims and one of the survivors asked the Connecticut Supreme Court on Tuesday to hear their appeal a month after their civil suit against Remington Arms Company Bushmaster Firearms, Camfour Holding and Riverview Gun Sales of East Winsdor was tossed out by Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis.

The families’ appeal argues that the state’s highest court should decide whether the sellers of the weapon used in the shooting can be held accountable under state law.

According to a statement, the families’ appeal asks the Supreme Court to consider the scope of the common law of negligent entrustment in Connecticut and its application to circumstances and technology that could not have been contemplated when the cause of action was first recognized.

Families of the victims had brought a civil suit in April 2015 against the manufacturer, distributor and seller of the AR-15 rifle used by Adam Lanza on Dec. 14, 2012 at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown. Lanza killed 26 people, including 20 children. Victoria Soto, a Stratford native and teacher at Sandy Hook, was one of the victims. Lanza killed himself during the shooting.

In a statement issued Tuesday, attorney Josh Koskoff said that, “We feel strongly that the critical issues raised in this case belong before our state’s Supreme Court and we hope the Court agrees.

“The Supreme Court not only sets precedent but also reviews the applicability and relevance of prior decisions, and works to ensure that the common law is up-to-date with the realities and dangers of a changing world,” Koskoff added.

“[T]he loss of twenty first-graders and six educators would shake any community to its core,” the appeal papers read. “Ours had to grapple with the manner in which those lives were lost. Children and teachers were gunned down in classrooms and hallways with a weapon that was designed for our armed forces and engineered to deliver maximum carnage. The assault was so rapid that no police force on earth could have been expected to stop it.”

The families also argue that the language in the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA) has to be determined by the state’s highest court. In Bellis’s decision on Oct. 14, she said the plaintiffs’ allegations “do not fit within the common-law tort of negligence entrustment under well established Connecticut law, nor do they come within the PLCAA [Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act]’s definition of negligent entrustment.” Bellis’s ruling also said the plaintiffs “cannot avail themselves of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA) to bring this action within PLCAA’s exceptions allowing lawsuits for violation of a state statute applicable to the sale of marketing of firearms.”

The appeal was filed in the state Appellate Court Clerk’s office. It is not immediately clear when the Supreme Court will decide if it will hear the case.

Stay with the Stratford Star and the HAN Network for more information on this story.</s>The families of nine victims of the December 2012 Sandy Hook massacre – whose lawsuit against Remington Arms was dismissed by Connecticut Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis on Oct. 14 – have filed an appeal of that decision with the state Supreme Court.

“We feel strongly that the critical issues raised in this case belong before our state’s Supreme Court and we hope the court agrees,” said the families’ attorney Joshua Koskoff.

The families maintain that Remington was responsible for selling what it termed a semi-automatic rifle, used by Adam Lanza to kill 20 first-graders and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School on Dec. 14, 2012.

In her ruling, Bellis agreed with Remington attorneys that the lawsuit should be dismissed under the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which protects gun makers from liability when their firearms are used in crimes.</s>HARTFORD, Conn. (Tribune News Service) — The families of some of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting victims Tuesday appealed a Superior Court judge’s ruling dismissing their lawsuit against the manufacturer of the gun used in shooting.

The appeal was filed in Appellate Court, but the plaintiffs are requesting the case to be heard by the state Supreme Court. The families of 10 victims filed the lawsuit in January 2015 seeking to hold the Remington Outdoor Co. liable for the massacre because it marketed a gun to the public it knew was made for military use.

“We feel strongly that the critical issues raised in this case belong before our state’s Supreme Court and we hope the Court agrees,” said the families’ attorney, Josh Koskoff of Koskoff, Koskoff & Bieder. “The Supreme Court not only sets precedent but also reviews the applicability and relevance of prior decisions, and works to ensure that the common law is up-to-date with the realities and dangers of a changing world.”

Adam Lanza shot his way into the Newtown school on Dec. 14, 2012, and fired 154 bullets in about five minutes from a Bushmaster AR-15 killing 26 people, including 20 first-graders.

The lawsuit also named Camfour Holding LLC, the gun’s distributor, and Riverview Sales, the East Windsor gun shop where Nancy Lanza, Adam’s mother, bought the AR-15. Bellis dismissed the lawsuit against Camfour but left it pending against Riverview Sales, which has since been closed by federal authorities for other violations.

In a 54-page written ruling on the widely watched case, Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis agreed with attorneys for Remington Outdoor Co. that the lawsuit “falls squarely within the broad immunity” provided to gun manufacturers and dealers by federal law, specifically the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.

The judge made it clear the families’ claims that the gun company should be held liable for Adam Lanza’s actions did not meet the narrow exceptions the federal law allows.

“Although PLCAA provides a narrow exception under which plaintiffs may maintain an action for negligent entrustment of a firearm, the allegations in the present case do not fit within the common-law tort of negligent entrustment under well-established Connecticut law, nor do they come within PLCAA’s definition of negligent entrustment, “ Bellis wrote.

The judge also ruled that the plaintiffs could not win under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA).

“A plaintiff under CUTPA must allege some kind of consumer, competitor, or other commercial relationship with a defendant, and the plaintiffs here have alleged no such relationship, “ the judge wrote.

The families’ appeal, Koskoff said, “asks the Supreme Court to consider the scope of the common law of negligent entrustment in Connecticut and its application to circumstances and technology that could not have been contemplated when the cause of action was first recognized.”

The families argue that the meaning of certain language in CUTPA must be determined by the Supreme Court, Koskoff said.

©2016 The Hartford Courant (Hartford, Conn.)

 Visit The Hartford Courant at www.courant.com

 Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.</s>(CNN) The families of nine victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre -- who filed suit against gun makers and recently lost their bid to take the case to trial -- are now asking Connecticut's Supreme Court to hear their appeal.

In October, Connecticut superior court judge Barbara Bellis ruled in favor of Remington -- the gun manufacturer of the Bushmaster AR-15, used by 20-year-old Adam Lanza to kill 20 children and six educators -- by granting their motion to strike the case. Previously, Bellis had allowed the discovery phase to proceed and had even assigned a tentative trial date for 2018.

In their appeal, attorneys for the families describe the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School as "a singular event in Connecticut history" that was carried out by a man with a weapon "designed for our armed forces and engineered to deliver maximum carnage." They argue Remington is responsible since the company "chose to sell a weapon of war and aggressively market its assaultive capabilities."

"It is only appropriate that Connecticut's highest court decide whether these families have the right to proceed."

In her October order in favor of Remington, Bellis ruled that gun makers are immune by the provisions set forth in a federal statute known as the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. That law, signed by President George W. Bush in 2005, has since prohibited lawsuits against gun manufacturers and distributors if their firearms are used in a criminal act.

"If you were starting over again to create the safest environment for our society you would not write this law," said Ian Hockley, whose 6-year-old son Dylan was killed in the mass shooting. "It is unnatural in the level of protection it gives the gun industry. Instead you would create roles ensuring that such weapons are entrusted to responsible citizens who comply with sensible laws about the training required to own one and their safe storage and usage."

The Sandy Hook families had sought an exemption to the law through a claim of "negligent entrustment," arguing the companies knowingly marketed and sold the AR-15 to a particularly vulnerable group of young men.

"We feel strongly that the critical issues raised in this case belong before our state's Supreme Court and we hope the Court agrees," said the families' attorney Josh Koskoff in a press release.

"Our only goal in bringing this appeal is to help prevent the next Sandy Hook from happening," said Nicole Hockley, mother of Dylan, in a statement. "And we have faith that Connecticut's Supreme Court will take up what is literally a matter of life and death."

"As a father who lost a bright and shining child, all we ask is for our day in court to address the negligence of these companies," said David Wheeler, whose son, Benjamin, age 6, was also killed in the Sandy Hook shooting.

Remington have not responded to CNN's request for comment.</s>A judge dismissed the lawsuit against Remington Arms in October, citing a federal law that shields gun manufacturers from most lawsuits over criminal use of their products.

Adam Lanza killed 20 first-graders and six educators with a Remington-made rifle. The lawsuit says the Madison, North Carolina-based company should not have sold such a dangerous weapon to the public.

Remington’s lawyers dispute the allegations and expect the appeal to be dismissed. Remington Outdoor Co. was previously known as Freedom Group.

This story has been corrected to show that Remington Outdoor Co. was previously known as Freedom Group.
The families of those killed in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings of 2012 ask the Connecticut Supreme Court to reverse a lower court dismissal of their lawsuit against Remington Arms, maker of the Bushmaster rifle used by murderer Adam Lanza.