Mandalay Bay Vegas jumps the shark!

6 posts / 0 new
Last post
Mandalay Bay Vegas jumps the shark!

Typical US capitalistic “sue the Las Vegas victims asses off” lawyer controlled society

voice of the damned

Lawsuits have been filed against both MGM and concert promoter Live Nation, accusing the companies of not have adequate security or properly trained staff.

So would this argument also apply to, say, that South Carolina church that got shot up by the white-supremacist kid a couple of years back?

voice of the damned

lawyer controlled society 

Well, in fairness, it's the fact that it's a lawyer controlled society that gives the victims the right to sue in the first place.

Serious question, 'cuz I really don't know. Would this kind of lawsuit(ie. against the hotel) fly in Canada?

Mr. Magoo

I think that in either jurisdiction, it would come down to whether or not a court believed that the hotel or the concert promoter were, in fact, remiss in their duty to prevent this.  It's worth noting that while a criminal case typically ends with either conviction or acquittal, a tort case could end with, say, the hotel being found 10% responsible, with damage awards prorated accordingly.

Please don't quote me on this, because I don't know this for sure, but I seem to recall reading that sometimes, when people who suffer catastrophic injuries sue someone who doesn't intuitively seem responsible (e.g. someone who rides a BMX bike off their roof, breaking their neck and suing the bicycle manufacturer) it's motivated by an insurance company who won't pay until all other avenues of redress have been tried.  Again, though, I could be wrong.

But it's the first thing I think of when someone sues someone else for what seems much more like plain bad luck, or being in the wrong place at the wrong time, or taking chances.


I agree that often strange tort suits get filed where the wrong people seem to be suing each other because it is not the individuals fighting it is their insurance companies. This one seems fairly straight forward given that the hotel was sued and it responded by suing everyone even remotely connected with the incident. That's standard practise and the hotels insurance lawyers would be calling the litigation shots including looking to get in fromt of the judge of their chosing. I personally think many aspects of the US justice system are seriously flawed and often problems arises out of state versus federal jursidiction uncertainties.

Mr. Magoo

Las Vegas lawyer Robert Eglet, who is representing several victims, told the paper that the hotel’s unusual action is a pre-emptive strike to get the cases heard in federal court instead of state court. Englet said MGM must believe it has better chances of victory in a federal case.

The MGM lawsuits are a “blatant display of judge shopping” that “quite frankly verges on unethical,” according to Eglet.

I'm not an American lawyer, so I guess I don't understand:  why does whether this is a federal suit or a State suit depend on where MGM/Live Nation decide to countersue?  What I mean is, how does this change whether individual or class-action suits from victims will be heard at a federal level or a State level?  I don't doubt that they're "judge shopping", but what quirk of law makes it this easy?