MGM sues all victims of Las Vegas mass shooting
Forums:
You can't make this shit up.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5962191/Mandalay-Bay-hotel-owner-MGM-sues-Las-Vegas-massacre-victims.html?ito=social-twitter_dailymailus
Mandalay Bay hotel owner MGM has filed suit against more than 1,000 victims of the Las Vegas massacre as it tried to kill off any future lawsuits over the mass shooting.
Lawyers for MGM Resorts International, which also owns the venue where the Route 91 Harvest Music Festival was held, has asked a judge to find that the company is not liable for deaths, injuries or damage caused at the event.
The lawsuit claims sympathy for the victims, saying that 'years of drawn out litigation' is not in their best interests.
But Robert Eglet, who is representing several victims, called the lawsuit 'outrageous' and 'bordering on unethical'.
MGM Resorts International, which owns the Mandalay Bay hotel in Las Vegas, has asked a federal judge to dismiss any future lawsuits brought by 2017 massacre victims
MGM, which also owns the site where the Route 21 Harvest Music Festival was taking place (pictured from the hotel), says litigation 'is not in the best interests of victims'
Eglet, who spoke to the Las Vegas review journal, was particularly incensed at MGM's decision to file the suit in a federal court.
MGM is a Nevada company and since the shooting happened in Nevada, any attempt to move the case outside the state amounted to 'judge shopping', he claimed.
'I've never seen a more outrageous thing, where they sue the victims in an effort to find a judge they like. It's just really sad that they would stoop to this level,' he said.
Stephen Paddock killed 58 people and wounded hundreds more when he opened fire on the festival from his hotel suite
MGM filed its lawsuit on Friday in Nevada and California arguing that all future lawsuits against the company 'must be dismissed'.
In their argument, lawyers say MGM is protected by a 2002 ruling that extends liability protection to any company that uses 'anti-terrorism' technology.
MGM says the security company it hired for the event, Contemporary Services Corp, was certified by the Department of Homeland Security for 'protecting against and responding to acts of mass injury and destruction.'
Lawyers argue that the protection extends to MGM, since it hired the security firm.
Eglet described the grounds for the lawsuit as 'obscure'.
The suit is potentially complicated by the fact that the FBI has refused to define the attack as terrorism, because shooter Stephen Paddock had no clear motive.
Paddock opened fire from the window of a suite inside the Mandalay Bay Hotel on the Route 91 Harvest music festival, which was taking place opposite, on October 1 last year.
For around 15 minutes Paddock rained more than 1,100 bullets down on the crowd using assault rifles that had been legally modified to fire on fully automatic mode.
He killed 58 people and wounded at least 300 more before being found dead by police from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.
- Log in to post comments
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: _
Does anyone on this board
Does anyone on this board think MGM is liable for this shooting?
Seems ridiculous to me.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
Does anyone on this board
Does anyone on this board actually think MGM is responsible for this shooting in any way?<<<
The real question is whether you or anyone really believes that any of the victims ought to be subject to a lawsuit?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: _
No dude, MY QUESTION IS THE
No dude, MY QUESTION IS THE REAL QUESTION. Your question can go sit in the back of the bus.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: St. Mark
>>>Does anyone on this board
>>>Does anyone on this board think MGM is liable for this shooting?
I believe they are, yes. MGM has a responsibility to ensure security on their property, which they failed to do.
I'm still not clear on how this guy brought a small arsenal undetected into one of the most heavily surveiled buildings on the planet; but he did, and MGM should ultimately be liable for that.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: New & Improved
They're putting a cork in the
They're putting a cork in the dyke. Dirty business.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: _
I don't want to be searched
I don't want to be searched on vacation. I wouldn't let a hotel search, x-ray or even examine my bags. If other people are like me and unwilling to have their personal items examined, it's impossible for MGM to stop this sort of thing.
Even if we all did allow this type of intrusion, I question if it's economically feasible for every hotel in the country to hire security to perform these searches.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Bucky Badger
It’s pretty clear how he
It’s pretty clear how he brought the small arsenal up, he had the bellmen help him with luggage carts, as that is their job. I’ve arrived at hotels in Vegas with work cases before that could have had dynamite in them, how is the bellman supposed to know what’s in your luggage? I’m not sure where the fault lies, if any besides his own, in dude getting his arsenal up to his room.
This is a pretty unique and fucked up situation. Obviously, MGM being a publicly owned corporation is going to cover their asses as much as possible. Is it messed up that it’s come to this? Yes. Am I surprised? No
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: St. Mark
There are definitely
There are definitely legitimate concerns here about privacy and the practicality of security logistics.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
No dude, MY QUESTION IS THE
No dude, MY QUESTION IS THE REAL QUESTION. Your question can go sit in the back of the bus<<<
How would you like being sued by MGM after a loved one had perished in your arms at the event?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: New & Improved
Ypu can get anything you want
Ypu can get anything you want into your room if you tip the bellman $100. That might be the issue if that transaction was captured.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Lucky Day
(No subject)
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: _
>> How would you like being
>> How would you like being sued by MGM after a loved one had perished in your arms at the event?
I wouldn't have claimed MGM was liable or perused a lawsuit against them, so I would never be named in such a countersuit.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Def. High
In all hotels that I have
In all hotels that I have ever rented rooms in I made several trips to the car to bring in more stuff. Room is usually closer to the rear door - all I need is my room key to open that door and I can bring up whatever I like.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Lucky Day
Housekeeping or hotel
Housekeeping or hotel personnel is supposed to enter the room at least once in a 72 hour period and I think I remember hearing that didn’t happen in this case.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: _
>> Housekeeping or hotel
>> Housekeeping or hotel personnel is supposed to enter the room at least once in a 72 hour period and I think I remember hearing that didn’t happen in this case.
Housekeeping was in Paddock's room.
"Importantly, as it relates to the terrible tragedy on October 1, there were numerous interactions with Stephen Paddock every day at the resort, including a room service delivery and a call with housekeeping on October 1, all of which were normal in nature. As a result of these interactions, there was no need to conduct a welfare check. Further, Mandalay Bay staff, room service and housekeeping had contact with Paddock or entered his suite more than 10 times over the course of his stay, including the three days leading up to October 1."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mandalay-bay-shooting-suspect-stephen-paddo...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: St. Mark
Wait. MGM staff went in this
Wait. MGM staff went in this dude's room 10 times and didn't notice the, um, pile of fucking gun cases stacked up by the window as he planned the largest mass shooting in US history?
The fuck?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Without a net
Who the fuck cares if
Who the fuck cares if housekeeping was in the room...
The fact that MGM is doing this is absolutely absurd and heartless.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: _
>> pile of fucking gun cases
>> pile of fucking gun cases
He brought in normal suitcases, not gun cases. You can see the video here.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
There a difference between a
There's a difference between a hotel & casino hotel.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Philzone Refugee
MGM's lawyers are doing what
MGM's lawyers are doing what corporate lawyers do.
Out of court settlement with the victims' families likely.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Ken D.
MGM "suing" the victims is a
MGM "suing" the victims is a bit misleading. MGM isn't seeking money from them. Instead, it sounds like they have preemptively filed a request for declaratory relief in US District Court asking the judge to rule, as a matter of law, that the casino cannot be liable based on some prior case law exonerating public establishments from liability for terrorist acts where the establishment had hired a security company with certain anti-terrorist qualifications. Makes sense from a purely business and legal perspective, but sounds like it might be a Hail Mary pass. I haven't read the case law MGM is relying on but I suspect the judge will say this is too fact specific and punt the individual cases to the jury.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Without a net
I know a guy who vended a
I know a guy who vended a festival last Spring in Vegas, he's a glass blower, brought 6 gun cases into the hotel it was at..
https://www.jambase.com/article/bender-jamboree-announces-inaugural-lineup
No search, nothing.
This was not long after the shooting massacre.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Bucky Badger
>>>>Housekeeping or hotel
>>>>Housekeeping or hotel personnel is supposed to enter the room at least once in a 72 hour period and I think I remember hearing that didn’t happen in this case
ive heard this mentioned before I stay in hotels all the time for a week or so and in Vegas too and I always have my “do not disturb” sign on, all week. I don’t want anyone in my room. No one, to my knowledge, ever comes in. I believe that 72 hour rule is a myth or is never enforced. Like who would keep track and keep on top of that shit anyway in 4,000 hotel rooms?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: St. Mark
Wow. I hadn't seen that
Wow. I hadn't seen that footage. Thanks for posting that, Ender.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: El Nino
I’m not a lawyer so I don’t
I’m not a lawyer so I don’t know if the victims have a case or not. I think they should have the right to sue and let the courts decide. It’s obvious that MGM thinks it has the right to counter sue, and that is worth more to them than the bad publicity of suing victims of a mass shooting that happened on your property. So based on that I would say that at least MGM’s lawyers think the victims have a strong case. It isn’t easy avoiding MGM in Las Vegas for those that want to boycott.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Lucky Day
>>>>>Like who would keep
>>>>>Like who would keep track and keep on top of that shit anyway in 4,000 hotel rooms?
The Housekeeping Manager
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
MGM "suing" the victims is a
MGM "suing" the victims is a bit misleading. MGM isn't seeking money from them<<<
I see what you're getting at in the strict sense of the word; however, if the victims do have ground to sue MGM, then wouldn't this lawsuit essentially be targeting potential monetary rewards that might be due to the victims?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Ken D.
>>>> if the victims do have
>>>> if the victims do have ground to sue MGM, then wouldn't this lawsuit essentially be targeting potential monetary rewards that might be due to the victims?
MGM's "lawsuit" seeks to determine whether or not, as an initial matter and even assuming all the facts the victims are alleging against MGM are true, the victims have some legal grounds to sue. If there is no legal basis for liability in the first instance (again even assuming everything the victims are alleging is true) then there would be no potential monetary rewards for MGM take away. That's the theory at least.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Bucky Badger
I think it’s to prevent them
I think it’s to prevent them from getting money from MGM
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
>>>> if the victims do have
>>>> if the victims do have ground to sue MGM, then wouldn't this lawsuit essentially be targeting potential monetary rewards that might be due to the victims?
MGM's "lawsuit" seeks to determine whether or not, as an initial matter and even assuming all the facts the victims are alleging against MGM are true, the victims have some legal grounds to sue. If there is no legal basis for liability (again even assuming everything the victims are alleging is true) then there would be no potential monetary rewards for MGM take away. That's the theory at least.<<<
While I see the distinction you're making, I have a difficult time de-coupling the two.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Philzone Refugee
Has anyone sued Jason Aldean?
Has anyone sued Jason Aldean? Maybe it was the Bro-Country that set the guy off?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: _________
Mandalay Is TOAST Guaranteed
Mandalay Is TOAST Guaranteed BullDozed Over __ Start again
VEGAS As A Whole Will Not Allow Mandalay To Continue
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Def. High
Nah - open now, open in
Nah - open now, open in future too. Maybe new owner.
Soon enough a new mass shooting will distract us from this one.
And so it goes.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: _________
Glen Walker KTLA News Anchor
Glen Walker KTLA News Anchor Says Less than 7 Years Mandalay Toast
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
Las Vegas is a shithole.
Las Vegas is a shithole.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: St. Mark
Java Dave with yet another
Java Dave with yet another joke about a mass shooting?
Dude made a shitty joke about the Aurora theater shooting back when thaat happened too.
Cool cool, bro
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Philzone Refugee
Explaining sarcasm to you is
Explaining sarcasm to you is below my pay-grade here, Saint.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Bucky Badger
Not a cool subject to joke
Not a cool subject to joke about smh
take a lap
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: St. Mark
>>>Explaining sarcasm to you
>>>Explaining sarcasm to you is below my pay-grade here
I'm arguably the most sarcastic zoner ever; that said, knowing when sarcasm is inappropriate is obviously well above your "pay-grade", Java Dave.
Take another lap after you're done with the one Bucky just gave you. And then take two more.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Philzone Refugee
Yeah, sure, 6aint, I'll get
Yeah, sure, 6aint, I'll get right on that.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
1 lap = 1mile
1 lap = 1mile
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Philzone Refugee
btw, my jab was about rampant
btw, my jab was about rampant litigiousness.
Of course I feel sympathy for the victims' families, but I think the shooter is the only one responsible for this one (well, arguably the gun lobby and the legislators, but that's another fight for another day).
I agree with you that the video posted was disturbing. That guy could be just about any average Joe. It's bizarre that all this time later, no clear motive has been established.
The families should get every cent that the shooter owned, and it would be a smart PR move for MGM to reach some sort of reasonable settlement with these folks (that covers their expenses dealing with this nightmare, i.e. travel, hospital bills, funeral costs). I'm not sure how to put a dollar amount on lost lives.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Imagine
>>>No dude, MY QUESTION IS
>>>No dude, MY QUESTION IS THE REAL QUESTION. Your question can go sit in the back of the bus.
I'm with Ender on this one.
lol
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Imagine
Dave, it was funny. Chuckle
Dave, it was funny. Chuckle and move on.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
Of course I feel sympathy for
Of course I feel sympathy for the victims' families, but but but the poncho <<<<
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: _
>> it would be a smart PR
>> it would be a smart PR move for MGM to reach some sort of reasonable settlement with these folks (that covers their expenses dealing with this nightmare, i.e. travel, hospital bills, funeral costs). I'm not sure how to put a dollar amount on lost lives.
This happened long ago voluntarily.
The $31.4 million in total contributions collected by the fund came from more than 90,000 donors locally, nationally and internationally, with 40 percent of the total amount donated by the Southern Nevada gaming industry. The Vegas Strong Fund, established by some of the big-name casino companies, donated $5.2 million toward the victims’ fund, and MGM Resorts, which owns the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino where the gunman carried out his attack, contributed another $4 million individually.
https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/las-vegas-victims-fund-to-begin...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Lance minimum goad Newberry
>>>MGM has a responsibility
>>>MGM has a responsibility to ensure security on their property<<<... within reason.
Based on what I have heard about how it went down I do not think MGM is liable for what happened in this case.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Thumbkinetic
Gonna leave it to the lawyers
Gonna leave it to the lawyers.
Either way, let's not piss Ender off.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Bucky Badger
FYI Viva wont be legally
FYI Viva wont be legally responsible when one of its members shoots others with their guns