Only In America...

Fkn crazy

tempo_n_groove said:

Meltdown99 said:

Mandalay Bay casino owner sues survivors of Las Vegas gun massacre

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/mgm-las-vegas-lawsuit-1.4750500?cmp=FB_Post_News

This may come off as callous but what is Mandalay bay supposed to do?  They have 2500 lawsuits against them pending.  That is insane.

If this would take precedent in the courts then every time an incident happens the promoter/venue whatever will be held liable.

The concert venue there might be held accountable.  Eventually it all snowballs out of control with litigation.

This makes sense to me.  It comes off as crazy but how in the hell are they going to sit there and be sued by everyone else for some psycho's actions.  I don't see how they can be held liable.

oftenreading said:

They don’t have to sue; they can instead defend the suits against them. 

It would be easier to understand this if further details were given about the process. I assume (and hope) that they aren’t actually suing the victims for any financial costs, but are instead just trying to bar them from launching their own suits. But do the victims have to appear in court to defend themselves? My rather limited understanding is that if a suit is launched against you and you don’t appear to defend yourself, then you typically lose. If so, I agree it’s egregious of MGM to force grieving victims into court. 

Most of the filings were in California due to injuries sustained and limiting their travel to LV so it was thought out.

Secondly the suits filed by Mandalay are not monetary but for liability.  If they get nailed with liability then they will pay into tens of millions and set a precedent in future cases.

F Me In The Brain said:

oftenreading said:

They don’t have to sue; they can instead defend the suits against them. 

It would be easier to understand this if further details were given about the process. I assume (and hope) that they aren’t actually suing the victims for any financial costs, but are instead just trying to bar them from launching their own suits. But do the victims have to appear in court to defend themselves? My rather limited understanding is that if a suit is launched against you and you don’t appear to defend yourself, then you typically lose. If so, I agree it’s egregious of MGM to force grieving victims into court. 

I thought it said they are suing the people who either sued them or did not agree not to sue them. 

We sue over everything here.  My fishing trip last weekend had 2 lawyers and 4 doctors on it.  The talk of lawsuits surrounding medical stuff made me want to vomit.  So many assholes out there doing everything they can to take advantage of the system.  The system responding and making all of these crazy rules just to try and make sure they don't get sued.  I had to go and hang with the regular folk a few times to get out of the shit conversations that group was having.

I agree that the US is certainly lawsuit-happy, but having said that, I tend to think this counter-suit is an abuse of the legal system. The law which they are trying to base it on was designed to limit the liability of manufacturers of counter-terrorism equipment/services in case their product did not perfectly prevent a terrorist attack. This is not that situation.

However, I do think it's interesting that, for this case to succeed, it has to define the shooting as "terrorism". Some people are so reluctant to do that, since it doesn't involve a brown Muslim person. 

F Me In The Brain said:

They are inside luggage I don't think anyone would know the difference
Dude could take multiple trips

I think there's a fine line in this situation where the hotel staff/security/manager should be held partially responsible, as should the gun manufacturer and whoever designed those bump stocks. The hotel was lax in its security because they had no reason to expect something like this so they didn't raise an eye when the shooter reserved all those rooms and hauled in bag after bag of guns and ammo. That should have drawn attention, and probably did, but none of them considered the type of scenario that played out being a risk.

Doesn't anyone remember the airlines being sued after 9/11? They won a major lawsuit. It sucks, but we have security measures for a reason.

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/18/nyregion/cantor-fitzgerald-settles-9-11-lawsuit-for-135-million.html

How many lawsuits in the kids stuck in a cave case? Are there any? 

The problem isn’t Mandalay Bay, it’s the US legal system and our people’s over willingness to use it for everything.