Months after the October 2017 mass shooting at Mandalay Bay hotel, MGM Resorts International is filing a lawsuit against more than 1,000 Vegas shooting survivors in federal court. According to the Las Vegas Review Journal, the company is asking federal courts to declare them not liable for the deaths in the attack.
The tragic 2017 shooting at the country musical festival in Las Vegas killed 58 people and injured another 851. The gunman stayed at the Mandalay Bay hotel. As of right now, more than 450 victims have filed suit since against MGM Resorts, which owns Mandalay Bay and Route 91 Harvest festival venue. The Las Vegas Review Journals reports that the victims argue that the company had a “duty of reasonable care” and should have mention the actions of the shooting better.
The lawsuits don’t claim that the survivors owe the company for any damages, and it is instead a preventative measure to protect the company, the Las Vegas Review Journal reports. MGM’s lawsuit argues that “plaintiffs have no liability of any kind to defendants” and that the lawsuits against them “must be dismissed”. As the Review Journal explains, MGM is trying to get ahead of any possible damages that the survivors are claiming they might be liable for. The lawsuit names more than 800 defendants in California and 200 defendants in Nevada, according to NPR.
“The Federal Court is an appropriate venue for these cases and provides those affected with the opportunity for a timely resolution. Years of drawn out litigation and hearings are not in the best interest of victims, the community and those still healing,” says MGM Resorts spokeswoman Debra DeShong, in a released statement.
Las Vega attorney Robert Eglet who has represented many of the shooting victims said in response to the Review Journal, “I’ve never seen a more outrageous thing, where they sue the victims in an effort to find a judge they like. It’s just really sad that they would stoop to this level.”
MGM Resorts says in the lawsuit as well that the security company at the concert provided a bunch of services designed to prevent mass violence. Each of those serves were certified by the Department of Homeland Security, which makes the hotel not liable. According to the Review Journal, MGM’s lawsuit is based on a previous act passed in 2002. The act stated that companies employing “anti-terrorism” services or technology wouldn’t be held liable for any damages, so because the company hired protective services certified by the DHS, they cannot be sued.
According to Daily Mail, the FBI hasn’t classified the attack as terrorism, which would be a major issue in MGM’s reasoning. The act refers to acts of terrorism, but according to the Review Journal it has a broader definition of “terrorism” than the FBI. The 2002 act defines it as “mass destruction, injury, or other loss.”
