Social MGM sues Vegas shooting victims

[CWMMA]

They shouldn’t be suing MGM in the first place. Ridiculous attempt to cash in on a travesty.

 

[KnightTemplar]

I know there is a Vegas shooting thread but figured this would get buried in that thread with the conspiracies...

WTF MGM:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44859238



I KINDA get the "why" but... Jeez.

Stay classy, MGM

 

[HIMBOB]

We anywhere on Paddocks motive?

I am no lawyer but if some dude is able to carry up 25 AK47s and 10,000 rounds into his hotel room.
It might be a tiny bit the fault of the hotel.

Especially if they are subject to any requirements seeing they are accommodating 1000s of people and I assume a casino in the same building.

 

[HIMBOB]

I agree, it's a fucked up look, but I can't help but think it's necessary to stave off the hand-wringing moralistic claims, which are immanently unrealistic, calling for things like "securing the festival grounds." Simply put, it's only a matter of time before someone goes on TV with tears in their eyes saying "If only they had just done MORE to prevent it!" and diving right into a lawsuit demanding some untenable solution - so, getting ahead of the curve might actually be beneficial here. If you've been watching a culture that sues companies over spilled coffee being too hot, you have to realize that it's quite possible this is coming.

Really, the only objection I can see from this stems from emotional response - that being, the people being sued (not for any material recompense) are victims, and that being sued has this vindictive, accusatory connotation to it. It's pure outrage culture at work. "What? They're being SUED? Martha, where's my pitchfork?"

Before we demonize the company, ask yourself - and provide a clear, feasible answer - to the question of "What do we actually want companies to do in this situation?" Explain to us what effective measures should be taken - in Vegas - to prevent this from happening. As you're asking yourself that, pay careful attention to the possibility of unintended, or even expected, but unwanted consequences. There does come a point where we're trying to put nerf padding on the corner of existence and it just doesn't make sense to do so...

The issue is if they followed the laws of the time.

I can believe the casino would let a few rules slide at the request of a big spender.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

Don't get me wrong, I don't think MGM/Mandalay Bay should be on the receiving end of the suit because it might of been their hotel but they weren't up their pulling the trigger.

THAT SAID, suing the victims of a crime to prevent them from pursuing what might be the only route they have for compensation for hospital stays and shit? Not a good look.

This.

There was no reasonable way they could have forseen this possibility, or prevented it from occuring.

And the more surprising factor is, there's no way to prevent it from occuring again from any high-rise building across America.

We can only hope that would-be mass murderers don't catch on. Thankfully, there's never been a copycat to the Oklahoma bombing in 1995, and hopefully there never will be for the Las Vegas shooting either.

All that said, MGM are fucking dicks, and if I ever go to Vegas again their hotel is the absolute last place I will stay.

 

[spamking]

Maybe getting sued out the ass will make hotels want to know what their guests are bringing onto their premises. Private property after all so if they want to check bags they can.

Yeah . . . forget that. We'll all just end up staying at home now if that happens. My goodness.

 

[spamking]

I am no lawyer but if some dude is able to carry up 25 AK47s and 10,000 rounds into his hotel room.
It might be a tiny bit the fault of the hotel.

Why? Couldn't someone doing something like this be possibly securing their inventory to sell at a gun show or something? I'm sure folks have brought in large amounts of luggage to big Vegas hotels for conventions, etc. before.

Now, having said that . . . I'd also imagine that an actual dealer would have made preparations or informed the hotel about what they were bringing up . . . maybe.

 

[lilelvis]

Straight up ruthless.

Counter suing is a normal legal tactic to keep the settlements sane.
Also, their insurance carriers have a legal obligation to defend them in court, even if they're wrong, using any tactic their underwriters choose.
This is basic shit.

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

I am no lawyer but if some dude is able to carry up 25 AK47s and 10,000 rounds into his hotel room.
It might be a tiny bit the fault of the hotel.

Not really unfortunately. What are they supposed to do about it?

 

[HockeyBjj]

The whole pre-emitively suit thing is weird to me. You don't go to court to prove your innocence, you go to court to prove guilt/non guilt

Wouldn't this be the same as simply defending themselves from lawsuits if they did come up? System need to not be so easy to cash out on a tragedy simply because it happened, and more where it is clear corners were cut or worse a known risk was ignored

 

[livingdeadmoose]

I am no lawyer but if some dude is able to carry up 25 AK47s and 10,000 rounds into his hotel room.
It might be a tiny bit the fault of the hotel.

I don’t blame the hotel for that. Disassemble those weapons and you can take all that up to your room in a few trips with some large duffel bags. Unless you have a barrel poking out or a round drops from your bag, nobody’s going to look twice at somebody carrying bags in a Vegas hotel.

 

[badascan]

The mgm is not at fault and needs to set a legal precedence right?

 

[Arkain2K]

MGM Agrees to Pay Las Vegas Shooting Victims Up to $800 Million
The settlement would resolve claims that MGM was negligent in allowing the killer to stockpile weapons and ammunition at its Mandalay Bay hotel.

By Richard A. Oppel Jr.| Oct. 3, 2019

MGM Resorts International has agreed to pay up to $800 million to settle lawsuits from victims of the October 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas that left 58 people dead and hundreds of others injured.

The killer, Stephen Paddock, holed up inside his room on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay hotel, which MGM owns, and then fired into the crowd at a country music festival below. It was the deadliest mass shooting in modern American history.

One of the lawyers for the victims, Robert Eglet, said on Thursday the settlement would be in the range of $735 million to $800 million and would resolve “substantially all” of the lawsuits and claims against MGM related to the massacre.

“While nothing will be able to bring back the lives lost or undo the horrors so many suffered on that day, this settlement will provide fair compensation for thousands of victims and their families,” Mr. Eglet said in a statement, adding that the deal “represents good corporate citizenship on” the part of MGM.

The company had at first responded with an aggressive legal strategy when claims poured in from the injured and the relatives of the dead, who accused MGM of negligence in allowing Mr. Paddock to stockpile high-powered rifles and thousands of rounds of ammunition in his hotel room.

It had sought to block victims from recovering any money from the company, arguing that a little-known federal law passed in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks meant that MGM enjoyed a shield from liability because the shooting qualified as an “act of terrorism” under the law’s expansive definitions.

Because of that — and also because a security firm hired for the concert possessed a special designation from the Department of Homeland Security — MGM argued that its interpretation of the law meant that it should not have to pay damage claims to injured concertgoers. The federal law is known as the Support Antiterrorism by Fostering Effective Technologies Act, or Safety Act.

As part of its strategy to have the company declared immune from liability by funneling cases to a federal court where that issue could be litigated, MGM sued more than 1,000 people who had already filed cases or indicated an intent to pursue claims against the company. Though the company’s lawsuits did not seek any money, the strategy stirred anger against MGM.

The settlement closely tracks the contours of a deal that MGM said in May was a “reasonably possible” outcome from mediation with the plaintiffs.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/03/us/mgm-las-vegas-shooting-settlement.html

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Vegas is also a massive shopping and industry convention center. There's absolutely nothing odd about people in their hotels carrying large luggage or bags. Can't fault them for not checking and considering its a super, super, super rare occurrence, they shouldn't be held liable.

 

[7437]

MGM Agrees to Pay Las Vegas Shooting Victims Up to $800 Million
The settlement would resolve claims that MGM was negligent in allowing the killer to stockpile weapons and ammunition at its Mandalay Bay hotel.

By Richard A. Oppel Jr.| Oct. 3, 2019

MGM Resorts International has agreed to pay up to $800 million to settle lawsuits from victims of the October 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas that left 58 people dead and hundreds of others injured.

The killer, Stephen Paddock, holed up inside his room on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay hotel, which MGM owns, and then fired into the crowd at a country music festival below. It was the deadliest mass shooting in modern American history.

One of the lawyers for the victims, Robert Eglet, said on Thursday the settlement would be in the range of $735 million to $800 million and would resolve “substantially all” of the lawsuits and claims against MGM related to the massacre.

“While nothing will be able to bring back the lives lost or undo the horrors so many suffered on that day, this settlement will provide fair compensation for thousands of victims and their families,” Mr. Eglet said in a statement, adding that the deal “represents good corporate citizenship on” the part of MGM.

The company had at first responded with an aggressive legal strategy when claims poured in from the injured and the relatives of the dead, who accused MGM of negligence in allowing Mr. Paddock to stockpile high-powered rifles and thousands of rounds of ammunition in his hotel room.

It had sought to block victims from recovering any money from the company, arguing that a little-known federal law passed in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks meant that MGM enjoyed a shield from liability because the shooting qualified as an “act of terrorism” under the law’s expansive definitions.

Because of that — and also because a security firm hired for the concert possessed a special designation from the Department of Homeland Security — MGM argued that its interpretation of the law meant that it should not have to pay damage claims to injured concertgoers. The federal law is known as the Support Antiterrorism by Fostering Effective Technologies Act, or Safety Act.


As part of its strategy to have the company declared immune from liability by funneling cases to a federal court where that issue could be litigated, MGM sued more than 1,000 people who had already filed cases or indicated an intent to pursue claims against the company. Though the company’s lawsuits did not seek any money, the strategy stirred anger against MGM.



The settlement closely tracks the contours of a deal that MGM said in May was a “reasonably possible” outcome from mediation with the plaintiffs.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/03/us/mgm-las-vegas-shooting-settlement.html

I guess preemptive lawsuits against victims of terrorism was a bad decision.

 

[Riptide]

Let’s talk about heartless. Screw mgm.

I hope MGM goes bankrupt and the board of directors get the flu this season.

Man this guy is a sherdog legend! I wonder if his wife still bang the cashier. Did I heard the story right?