Lawsuits claim MGM has no liability to Las Vegas shooting victims
Last edited Tue Jul 17, 2018, 01:20 PM - Edit history (1)
Source: Las Vegas Review Journal
MGM Resorts International has filed federal lawsuits against more than 1,000 Las Vegas mass shooting victims in an effort to avoid liability.
The company, which owns Mandalay Bay and the Route 91 Harvest festival venue, argues that it cannot be held liable for Oct. 1 deaths, injuries or other damages, adding that any claims against MGM parties must be dismissed, according to complaints filed Friday in Nevada and California.
Plaintiffs have no liability of any kind to defendants, the complaints argue.
The company cites a 2002 federal act that extends liability protection to any company that uses anti-terrorism technology or services that can help prevent and respond to mass violence.
In this case, the company argues, the security vendor MGM hired for Route 91, Contemporary Services Corp., was protected from liability because its services had been certified by the Department of Homeland Security for protecting against and responding to acts of mass injury and destruction.
The lawsuits argue that this protection also extends to MGM, since MGM hired the security company.
Read more: https://www.reviewjournal.com/crime/homicides/lawsuits-claim-mgm-has-no-liability-to-las-vegas-shooting-victims/
This is utterly appalling. A giant corporation like MGM is spitting on the graves of the victims in that horrible shooting. This is a new low.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)FailureToCommunicate
(14,013 posts)Appalling.
Gidney N Cloyd
(19,834 posts)sarcasmo
(23,968 posts)Initech
(100,068 posts)And this is unfiltered corporate greed at its finest.
truthisfreedom
(23,146 posts)atreides1
(16,076 posts)As defined by the FBI, this multiple murder is not terrorism!
I don't think this will go very far...but with a federal judge, you never know!!!
IronLionZion
(45,433 posts)Those victims were this corporation's customers.
While I get that there's only so much a hotel can do to prevent such an unthinkable tragedy, I would hold NRA and politicians more responsible. Especially the politicians who keep telling us that terrorists are brown and we should ignore the many angry white males killing Americans because each one is a mentally ill lone wolf, not a terrorist with legally purchased weapons of mass murder.
While the TSA and other government agencies harass brown people and sexually assault attractive women in skirts, the Stephen Paddocks of the world always get every courtesy and benefit of a doubt. Racism puts Americans in danger.
mpcamb
(2,870 posts)Take every penny from their corporate hands.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)a perfect example of the predatory nature of our country's financial/judicial system which has always protected wealth over the needs of the common citizen. Now we'll see what becomes of this counter-suit by MGM.
Initech
(100,068 posts)And the executives involved all get fired and blacklisted from the gaming industry. That would be the best possible outcome. The sad thing is MGM owns half the Strip, it would be pretty difficult to stage a boycott like that. I hope their PR department is working overtime.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)but weasel out of any liability for the inevitable results of that policy.
Watch this go all the way up to Dotard Traitor's kangaroo SCOTUS and be upheld!
no_hypocrisy
(46,088 posts)its guest, the shooter, to check in with a multitude of weapons, which he subsequently used to perpetrate mass murder.
christx30
(6,241 posts)Is MGM supposed to do searches of its guests prior to admitting them into the building?
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Armchair lawyers, what ya gonna do?
no_hypocrisy
(46,088 posts)BeatStanford
(20 posts)At least one of their attorneys may or may not have ever seen a petition for removal before.
FakeNoose
(32,634 posts)This is an outrage, and a new low.
If these lawsuits are allowed it could trigger a boycott of Las Vegas tourism.
Just sayin'
Corgigal
(9,291 posts)that corporations are people? If true, write those checks, and it will never be enough.
dembotoz
(16,802 posts)pretty damn funny
will white star lines sue the folks who drowned on the titanic?
how dare they not swim better!!!!
Bayard
(22,062 posts)I don't think this will play either.
Whiskeytide
(4,461 posts)... companies filing an action to declare them immune from liability. They arent suing the victims for anything other than a declaration on the issue of liability. They have to name all the victims/estates in order for the ruling - whatever it may eventually be - to have a binding effect.
Its kind of shitty - and is certainly a bad look - but the alternative would be defending dozens of separate actions and raising the defense in each one. They have an argument that has some merit. The concept of a property owner being liable for the criminal acts of a third person has always been a tough win for victims.
They are just trying to be more efficient by filing a single action to address that issue and apply it to all the existing and potential claims. Its kinda of a dick thing to do, but not as nefarious as its being made out to be.
UpInArms
(51,282 posts)sorry for the dupe
Cold War Spook
(1,279 posts)have proof that employees of the hotel knew what was in those bags, I don't see where the hotel is liable.