( CNN ) -- A multi-million dollar negligence lawsuit filed by the families of two victims of the 2007 Virginia Tech mass shooting has been dismissed by Virginia 's highest court . The state justices said Thursday that given the initial uncertainty and confusion surrounding the actions of the student gunman , `` there was no duty for the Commonwealth to warn students about the potential for criminal acts by third parties , '' meaning gunman Seung-Hui Cho . He went on a shooting rampage on the Blacksburg , Virginia , campus that left 32 people dead . The young man then took his own life . A county jury had awarded the estates of Erin Peterson and Julia Pryde $ 4 million each , saying the state was negligent . The amount was later reduced to $ 100,000 per family . The women were students at the state university . Virginia Tech shootings timeline . There was no initial reaction from the families , but a spokesman for state Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli said the justices ' conclusions were proper . `` While words can not express the tremendous sympathy we have for the families who lost their loved ones in the Virginia Tech shootings of 2007 -- including the Prydes and the Petersons -- the Virginia Supreme Court has found what we have said all along to be true : The commonwealth and its officials at Virginia Tech were not negligent on April 16 , 2007 , '' said Brian Gottstein . `` Cho was the lone person responsible for this tragedy . '' Cuccinelli is the Republican nominee for governor , and the general election is next Tuesday . At issue was the level of responsibility the state -- including university officials , as well as local and campus police -- should bear for the initial handling of Cho 's actions , which eventually spread out over several hours . Could his final rampage be reasonably foreseen ? Law enforcement on April 16 , 2007 , received a call of an incident inside a dormitory around 7:30 a.m. Officers arrived to find two gunshot victims , one fatal , and initially believed it be a `` domestic homicide , '' not a prelude to far more lethal killing spree to come . `` Police believed that this was an isolated incident that posed no danger to others and that the shooter had fled the area , '' said the Virginia Supreme Court 's 15-page ruling . `` They did not believe that a campus lockdown was necessary . '' Lawyers for the families had argued if such a precautionary lockdown was imposed immediately -- where students and the university community would be told to shelter in place -- the subsequent massacre inside an academic building may have been prevented or minimized . A killer in the family . The court concluded university officials were engaged and kept informed of the situation over time . Two hours after the initial incident , members of the University Policy Group -- consisting of school administrators -- sent out a campus-wide `` blast e-mail , '' informing students and faculty of the dorm shooting , and urging those to report anything suspicious . The mass shooting in Norris Hall began about 10 minutes later , prompting another immediate university `` blast e-mail '' stating `` a gunman is loose on campus . Stay in buildings until further notice . '' Peterson , 18 , and Pryde , 23 were among those murdered by Cho in Norris Hall . He was later linked to both the residence hall and academic building shootings . In general under state law , someone does not have a legal duty to warn or protect from someone else the criminal acts of a third person , unless a `` special relationship '' exists between one or more parties . Such relations might include those between employer/employee , airline/passenger , or innkeeper/guest . All such claims of wrongdoing in this context are fact-specific , and the Virginia court here determined the state reasonably -- if incorrectly -- determined the shooter had left the area . `` Based on the limited information available to the Commonwealth prior to the shootings in Norris Hall , '' said the seven justices , `` it can not be said that it was known or reasonably foreseeable that students in Norris Hall would fall victim to criminal harm . '' School officials expressed satisfaction with the court 's conclusions , saying the jury 's initial verdict was based on a misreading of state law . `` The court 's actions can never reverse the loss of lives nor the pain experienced by so many families and friends of victims of one person . In the end , the cause of these heinous acts and continuing heartbreak was a troubled and angry young man with easy access to powerful killing weapons , '' said Lawrence Hincker , associate vice president at Virginia Tech . The case is Commonwealth of Virginia v. Peterson ( 121717 ) .
Plaintiffs initially awarded $ 4 million each in negligence lawsuit . Award later reduced to $ 100,000 each . Virginia 's highest court said Virginia Tech that slaughter was not `` reasonably foreseeable ''