Hotel sues Las Vegas mass shooting victims
- hanno
- Expatriate
- Posts: 6774
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 12:37 pm
- Reputation: 3142
- Location: Phnom Penh
- Contact:
Hotel sues Las Vegas mass shooting victims
Get shot at and get sued. Only in Murica:
MGM Resorts denies liability for Las Vegas shooting, sues victims to block lawsuits
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/07/17/us/m ... index.html
MGM Resorts denies liability for Las Vegas shooting, sues victims to block lawsuits
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/07/17/us/m ... index.html
- armchairlawyer
- Expatriate
- Posts: 2490
- Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2015 1:43 pm
- Reputation: 1503
Re: Hotel sues Las Vegas mass shooting victims
It's all to do with forum selection, apparently MGM want the case heard in the Federal court as opposed to the state court. Seems they think things will be less emotive and awards will be lower. This kind of thing used to happen a lot in the EU where defendants initiated a claim in a country where they preferred to have the case (or where a long delay would occur). It was known as the Italian Torpedo.
The best example of forum selection was after the Bhopal disaster in 1984. A case was brought against Union Carbide. The victims wanted the case heard in the USA, UC wanted the case heard in India. Evidence was given that the waiting time before trial in India would be 20 years. UC won that point and were able to settle on much lower terms than if the case had been listed for hearing in the USA.
The best example of forum selection was after the Bhopal disaster in 1984. A case was brought against Union Carbide. The victims wanted the case heard in the USA, UC wanted the case heard in India. Evidence was given that the waiting time before trial in India would be 20 years. UC won that point and were able to settle on much lower terms than if the case had been listed for hearing in the USA.
Re: Hotel sues Las Vegas mass shooting victims
If I climb to the roof of your home and start shooting people, should the people I hit be able to sue you?
- armchairlawyer
- Expatriate
- Posts: 2490
- Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2015 1:43 pm
- Reputation: 1503
Re: Hotel sues Las Vegas mass shooting victims
It depends. The shooter was there as a paying guest, and he wasn't on the roof. BTW, I read that MGM also own the land on which the victims were standing. In reality, it's all about each side building the best case that they can and then they will settle. Forum selection can be part of building your best case.
Re: Hotel sues Las Vegas mass shooting victims
Ok, so if you rent out a room in your home, and from that room the tenant shoots me. Should you have to pay me?
Re: Hotel sues Las Vegas mass shooting victims
While I get that, is counter-suing really the only method to achieve that? I thought you could file legal motions to dismiss, or something like that.
This just reads like a brutal move, PR-wise. Not that it matters in the public eye, apparently, as bookings at the Mandalay Bay were only down "in the low to mid-single digits during the fourth quarter compared with that of the year-earlier period." according to MGM Resorts International Chief Executive Officer Jim Murren. Many of these bookings were probably made well in advance though.
I still visit Vegas twice a year but would never give them my business. I may be unfair and it's a thin line in regards to privacy of a VIP guest vs. checking what folks get up to but let's face it, if the cleaning maid sees something unlawful in your room, chances are she's going to tell someone as the staff has been instructed to do so, so your privacy is limited already. The guy behaved suspiciously over a period of several days and brought in a highly unusual amount of luggage, IMHO the hotel could/should have done more.
I also heard that hotels have a special police # to call and do not call 911 in case of an incident but their relationship with the cops and whatever corruption might have occurred there is another topic.
- that genius
- Expatriate
- Posts: 4064
- Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 7:53 am
- Reputation: 960
Re: Hotel sues Las Vegas mass shooting victims
I don't think it's beyond the bounds of reason to expect a hotel to maintain security and safety in its establishment.
Do you think someone bring in a semi-auto and hundreds of rounds of ammunition might fall into that category?
-
- Expatriate
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 11:36 am
- Reputation: 677
Re: Hotel sues Las Vegas mass shooting victims
I'll just wait for this to get down to the real questions.
Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk
Re: Hotel sues Las Vegas mass shooting victims
I imagine all of the people MGM has named in this lawsuit are people who have hired lawyers and asserted claims against MGM or put them on notice of their intention to sue. I could be wrong about that.
The lawsuit does not seek money from these claimants. It seeks a declaration from a federal judge that an obscure federal anti-terrorism law bars these claims because MGM or its event contractor followed some designated anti-terrorism protocols. I don't know much about this federal law or how terrorism is defined, but I see this as a mass murder, not an act of terrorism for political purposes designed to instill fear in the public at large.
I think MGM could assert the federal law as a defense in lawsuits filed in California and Nevada state courts, but they don't want to do that. At least in Clark County, Nevada, judges are elected. They don't like making high profile decisions that could be unpopular, then they might be voted out. They tend to be very wishy-washy and like to avoid making any tough decisions.
Also, state court judges in Nevada tend to be pro-plaintiff. Many of them are former plaintiff lawyers and solo practitioners who represented the poor, the downtrodden, the injured, the criminally accused, and those clients generally don't have a lot of money and unless you're really successful at representing them, it's hard to pay the bills. So they run for judge, because being a judge pays $100,000 a year plus benefits. They then ask for donations both from hotel-casinos and law firms to fund their campaigns. And Robert Eglet, who is representing the shooting victims and who is a wildly successful plaintiff's lawyer in Las Vegas, wisely donates a lot of money to judges.
That's why MGM wants a federal judge to rule on this issue of federal law. Federal judges, who have lifetime appointments, tend to be more serious and academic and actually read the motions you submit to them and will throw out cases before trial on legal "technicalities" like this. State court judges don't read everything and allow everything be a free fall and let cases go to trial more often.
I don't see naming a bunch of claimants in a declaratory judgment suit like this as a bad or controversial thing at all, though I appreciate the PR headache when people shout "MGM sues shooting victims"
The lawsuit does not seek money from these claimants. It seeks a declaration from a federal judge that an obscure federal anti-terrorism law bars these claims because MGM or its event contractor followed some designated anti-terrorism protocols. I don't know much about this federal law or how terrorism is defined, but I see this as a mass murder, not an act of terrorism for political purposes designed to instill fear in the public at large.
I think MGM could assert the federal law as a defense in lawsuits filed in California and Nevada state courts, but they don't want to do that. At least in Clark County, Nevada, judges are elected. They don't like making high profile decisions that could be unpopular, then they might be voted out. They tend to be very wishy-washy and like to avoid making any tough decisions.
Also, state court judges in Nevada tend to be pro-plaintiff. Many of them are former plaintiff lawyers and solo practitioners who represented the poor, the downtrodden, the injured, the criminally accused, and those clients generally don't have a lot of money and unless you're really successful at representing them, it's hard to pay the bills. So they run for judge, because being a judge pays $100,000 a year plus benefits. They then ask for donations both from hotel-casinos and law firms to fund their campaigns. And Robert Eglet, who is representing the shooting victims and who is a wildly successful plaintiff's lawyer in Las Vegas, wisely donates a lot of money to judges.
That's why MGM wants a federal judge to rule on this issue of federal law. Federal judges, who have lifetime appointments, tend to be more serious and academic and actually read the motions you submit to them and will throw out cases before trial on legal "technicalities" like this. State court judges don't read everything and allow everything be a free fall and let cases go to trial more often.
I don't see naming a bunch of claimants in a declaratory judgment suit like this as a bad or controversial thing at all, though I appreciate the PR headache when people shout "MGM sues shooting victims"
- cptrelentless
- Expatriate
- Posts: 3033
- Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2015 11:49 am
- Reputation: 565
- Location: Sihanoukville
Re: Hotel sues Las Vegas mass shooting victims
Except it wasn't a suspicious amount of luggage. Or any different to the hundreds of other weirdos who frequent Vegas hotels.
ANyhow, nobody knows what this guy's major malfunction was so I don't see that you can call it terrorism.
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 1 Replies
- 1791 Views
-
Last post by Soriya
-
- 88 Replies
- 14473 Views
-
Last post by Big Daikon
-
- 29 Replies
- 8297 Views
-
Last post by God'sGift
-
- 63 Replies
- 8650 Views
-
Last post by Sir Stephen
-
- 310 Replies
- 30001 Views
-
Last post by Chad Sexington
-
- 27 Replies
- 5105 Views
-
Last post by yong
-
- 3 Replies
- 3963 Views
-
Last post by Kenr
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Felgerkarb, Freightdog, IraHayes, Majestic-12 [Bot], newsgatherer, Old8404 and 618 guests