You talking about these guys? https://www.reviewjournal.com/crime...in-hallway-during-las-vegas-shooting-1418248/
Here was the plaintiff's theory. Without knowing what evidence they were going to put on its pointless to argue about what MGM did or didn't do wrong. Clearly after going through discovery they thought they may be subject to liability so they settled. “We can show through the totality of the events at MGM properties around world that this is something that could happen and was reasonably foreseeable, and they had a duty to provide adequate security and didn’t."
It was the best solution for all parties. Families and victims get something, they can start to try and put it behind them. MGM stops some bleeding by getting it off of the front page. The legal proceedings would continue to drag their brand. Settlers aren’t always guilty. They are playing the numbers.
I just have a hard time seeing it. Maybe if it went to court and they showed evidence maybe I'd change my mind. I just cant use hindsight to say they should have seen something that had never happened before it happened.
Just because you have a hard time seeing it doesn't mean it's not the prudent decision. People avoid litigation all the time because of uncertain results, costs, time, and public perception. You can't trust a jury or the discovery process.
I don't think it's unreasonable to try to hold parties accountable for their actions that may have contributed to a mass tragedy.
My BLaw professor said day one - “It’s not if someone can be sued. Anyone can be sued for any reason. It’s a question of if they can win.”
Sue the NRA. Sue the fed govt for allowing him to have 800 guns. Sue the manufacture that made the piece that turned his guns into auto. Those entities are much more responsible than the hotel. Blaming a hotel for not checking bags that he brought in over multiple days doesn't seem right to me. An attorney sees a payday and families want someone to blame so here we are.
https://news3lv.com/news/local/laws...facturer-could-be-one-octobers-lasting-legacy https://www.businessinsider.com/family-of-las-vegas-mas-shooting-victim-sues-gun-makers-2019-7
The federal government has soverign immunity and can't be sued unless it's waived that immunity. I'd venture a guess that they haven't. Gun manufacturers are also given wide immunity by federal law. The hotel can certainly take that stance but if your house isn't fully clean, you pay up and make it go away. They also don't want people crawling up their ass to see what they do and don't fuck up and also, they don't want to have a holding that changes the standards for hospitality companies with respect to the privacy or safety of their guests.
I understand how today's media works. Very little comes out after 2+ years. I wouldn't expect a bombshell to drop at trial.
No bombshell ever drops at trial. It's the discovery process that you need to be afraid of if you're Mandalay Bay.
Again, I understand why they settled. Insurance is picking up $750m of it. That doesn't change the fact that I think it's dumb for them to have been sued to begin with.
It’s entirely possible that a large company in their line of business did a risk assessment in the course of determining what insurance they need to have. It would not be impossible that that risk assessment mentioned mass shooters as a threat. What that risk assessment said and how the company responded would be part of discovery.
An attorney isn't going to risk being disbarred, having a huge fine, and submarine his case to break a confidentiality order and disclose something to the media. Again, you just don't understand the legal process which is fine.
I wouldn't expect a bombshell to come up in discovery. Better? The media has dug this case for 2+ years. If there was a bombshell, they would have found it.
Ahh here come the lawyers. Neat. I think it's shitty to blame the hotel. You're not going to change my mind.
Here come people who know what they are talking about, don't worry I have an uniformed opinion that won't change, don't try to educate me.
"ahhh here come the people who are well educated and informed of the legal process applicable to this situation. they're wrong and i am right tho" god you're dense
What if there was documentation that the hotel knew this was a risk and recommended changes that the hotel didn’t follow?
What if there were multiple emails from staff saying they saw this guy bringing guns into the room and suggesting it be investigated and they declined because he was a high roller and they didn't want to upset him
Nobody said MGM deserved all of the blame. I’m pretty sure general feeling is that there’s enough potential exposure that they hedged, negligence or not.
There are often internal documents that are stored, sometimes with very little access except from very high levels of an organization, that would be subject to discovery. Risk assessments, emails, every instance where there was a red flag that was ignored, video tapes of all that since everything is under surveillance.
For the 10th time, I get why they settled. I just haven't seen anything to this point that I feel that they were negligent.
I'm saying you think that information would have leaked and that is pure speculation. You don't know what they're hiding.
Obviously you don’t. You keep saying that they weren’t negligent and shouldn’t have been sued. But you don’t actually know that because you haven’t seen the evidence that would be produced in discovery. They don’t want you or anyone else to ever see that evidence.
I don't care if some risk assessment company presented as one of 8 million theories that someone could shoot a crowd from above. That's what those companies do. You can't plan accordingly for all of them. We'd never seen anything like this. Asking a company to take steps to prevent any and every scenario, even ones we've never seen, from happening isn't realistic. Obviously if there was specific info they knew on this guy and his plans then that would be different but I feel like that would have come out in the 2+ years since it happened.