MGM Agrees to Pay Up to $800 Million to Victims of 2017 Las Vegas Massacre

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: New York Times



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.

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

[FoxNewsSucks]

1. Seems to me that laws need to be changed

so that the gun manufacturers would be forced to pay settlements like this.

[progressoid]

2. So why is the hotel paying and not the gun manufacturers?

[groundloop]

3. Exactly.... gun manufacturers hold one of the keys to preventing this

It's not like a hotel could do a hell of a lot to prevent mass murder. Gun manufacturers, on the other hand....

[cstanleytech]

5. No idea as it does not make much sense to me either.

[Blue_Tires]

15. Didn't the NRA get the law changed so gunmakers were exempt legally?

[hack89]

16. Because they broke no laws nor did they sell directly to the gunman

it would be like being hit by a drunk and suing the brewery instead of the bar.

[progressoid]

18. What laws did the Hotel break?

[sir pball]

20. None either

They're under no legal obligation to inspect what a customer brings to their room, even if it is a larger than usual number of bags.

I suspect it's essentially a PR move; they're no doubt splitting the cost with their insurers and even if they pay the entire settlement themselves it's not a terrible ding seeing as how MGM Resorts Int'l made 11.8 billion dollars last year.

[hack89]

21. None that I know of

but they had direct interactions with the gunman - I understand the argument is they should have figured out that he had stock piled an arsenal in his room over the course of several days.

The gun manufacturers had no direct interaction with the gunman.

[LisaM]

22. Seems as if a bomb-sniffing dog would have found it.

I hope that they've taken this simple security measure since then, just have bomb-sniffing dogs go up and down the hallways from time to time.

[murielm99]

26. I thought I was the only one

who was bewildered by this.

[inwiththenew]

19. You go after the deepest pockets

MGM has way deeper pockets. Plus the chance of of winning against gun manufacturers is almost zero with the way the laws are now.

[MicaelS]

24. PLCAA

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Lawful_Commerce_in_Arms_Act?wprov=sfla1

[LuvNewcastle]

9. I've noticed that too.

A death in the family is always easier to deal with when there's money involved. I always feel sorry for people who don't get a payoff when a relative dies. That sucks! Anytime there's a death, there should always be someone to sue.

[Coventina]

14. Ick.

[Coventina]

13. Families of the victims may have lost the primary breadwinner for the family.

Death has real financial impact on families.

Geez.

[Yeehah]

23. Civil lawsuits serve a purpose

Pick up a book

[MrModerate]

6. So aside from Customer Relations...

AKA "Good corporate citizenship," MGM really has no obligation to pay anybody anything?

[Lulu KC]

7. Seriously, that is a lot of money to have in their coffers

ready to be paid to anyone--much less for this new type of "business expense."

[Firestorm49]

8. As tragic as it was, it wasn't the fault of the hotel.

[SpankMe]

10. MGM should now turn around and sue the gun manufacturer

It would set a good precedent.

[hack89]

17. Precedent has already been set

such a suit would go nowhere.

[Justice]

11. Claim was hotel was negligent in allowing shooter to stockpile ammunition and guns in his room

Wow.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

27. I don't think hotels care what's in your luggage.

Hopefully, you bring lots of money to lose at the casino. Beyond that, it's none of their business.

[IronLionZion]

12. How is a hotel going to know what people have in their luggage

Sure, this asshole brought excessive amounts of luggage. But how much is too much? A criminal can do damage with fewer weapons and the hotel is not going to know what's in the suitcase.

The most notable thing here is that MGM is arguing this was an "act of terrorism" but folks otherwise are claiming it's not because he didn't have a political agenda (or brown skin).