MGM Grand Settlement

[jazz4cash]

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeea Apparently the MGM lawyers disagree. They didn't have to pay a settlement -they chose to do so.

Exactly. Their insurance is making the payment. Apparently they think it’s better for business to pay the money and get it behind them. Fighting it could result in months of bad press.

[aaronc879]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jazz4cash Exactly. Their insurance is making the payment. Apparently they think it’s better for business to pay the money and get it behind them. Fighting it could result in months of bad press.

Then people complain about high insurance costs. Maybe if people couldn't sue when there is no negligence then insurance wouldn't be so high.

[Bestwifeever]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaronc879 MGM Grand has settled with the victims of the mass shooting for $800 million. While tragic what happened to all those people I don't see what MGM did that was negligent. That is a lot fo money to be paid out whether it's MGM or their insurance company. I understand the insurance company needing to pay for medical bills but beyond that I don't understand why they are responsible fro what this person did. Opinions? https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/03/u...ettlement.html

Why do you think MGM should pay for medical bills if you don’t think they are responsible for what the shooter did?

[aaronc879]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bestwifeever Why do you think MGM should pay for medical bills if you don’t think they are responsible for what the shooter did?

Good point. MGM shouldn't be liable for anything. Why stop at sueing them? Why not sue the Vegas Police Department. Why not sue the doctors and nurses that didn't save their lives or that helped someone else before you. I think people need to take responsibility for themselves, their own safety and health costs, rather than sueing other people.

[zedd]

Looking for meaning in the settlement, it, the settlement isn't a morality play, making right what was wronged, nor making those at a loss whole again. The settlement is a stop loss measure.


I'm sure one could find a better source but here's a reference citing the MGM Grand annual revenue at $1.13 BILLION.


https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/...le-resort.aspx


Tragic. Tragic loss of life. But the business of Vegas is business.

[Elbata]

The back story I'd like to read is how fast the lawyers got in touch with victims' families.

And I wonder if victims' families that will be getting this compensation really believe MGM is responsible.

It stinks IMO.

Talked to a PI lawyer and he says most companies just settle so they don't have to deal with all the years of legal proceedings.

35-50% of $800MM is not a bad payday.

[Scuba]

And in the end, the consumers pay. Higher hotel rates because insurance costs go up. And higher insurance costs as huge claims are paid out.

[joeea]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaronc879 I think people need to take responsibility for themselves, their own safety and health costs, rather than sueing other people.

Yup.

Those 58 people who died should have brought their own high-powered rifles. Y'know, just in case a nearby hotel let someone carry in 20 bags worth of firearms and opened fire at them.

Gotta take responsibility for yourself after all.

[ckelly78z]

Blame, has less to do with these situations than the appearance of blame. MGM probably settled for this amount to prevent bad publicity.

My BIL is a cop in Southern Florida, and over his 30 years, he has had 2 individuals that he needed to dispatch to protect himself, and the surrounding public (truly bad guys on Meth). In each occurrence, the city paid the mourning relatives a substantial amount to keep quiet, and prevent a riot.

[ExFlyBoy5]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elbata Talked to a PI lawyer and he says most companies just settle so they don't have to deal with all the years of legal proceedings. 35-50% of $800MM is not a bad payday.

And in smaller PI cases, the lawyer's fee is contingent. If the client accepts a settlement, the attorney gets 35% of it (as an example). If it proceeds to trial then a settlement before verdict then the attorney gets 40%. If it goes all the way to verdict, then the attorney gets 45%...so very often, the client will want the money NOW and wants to pay the attorney the lesser fee.

[Tiger8693]

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeea Yup. Those 58 people who died should have brought their own high-powered rifles. Y'know, just in case a nearby hotel let someone carry in 20 bags worth of firearms and opened fire at them. Gotta take responsibility for yourself after all.

You know, there's not always someone/company to be blamed. Of course, in this case there is.... the shooter.

Attorneys know they can go for the deep pockets and make everyone "feel better" by getting to blame someone. Oh, and make themselves rich in the process.

[Lienlord]

We live in a litigious society. Something bad happens, somebody has to pay. Find the deepest pocket, and make them spend millions defending themselves to prove they aren't liable. That's why I carry a ridiculous amount of liability insurance, to protect myself from the parasites that prey on the misfortunes of others.

Several years ago, I was riding my bike (on a bike trail) when a jogger who had bent over to tie her shoes stepped out without looking right in front of me. I wrecked trying to avoid her but still hit her with part of my body while crashing. She went down crying while I laid there, bleeding and in shock myself from the crash. Her husband (a parasite lawyer) ran right past his injured wife and started asking me my name and if I owned my home and had homeowners insurance! They sued me for $500K for his wife's "bump" and my insurance company had to litigate to get me off. I think they ended up paying her $30K for "medical bills?" right before we were to go to court.
I was furious to hear about the settlement, as I didn't feel I'd done anything wrong. But the insurance company attorney said I didn't have a say in it, and they were avoiding the cost of a trial that could exceed the settlement even if they won!
What a jacked up system!!

[Teacher Terry]

Lien, it’s that type of thing that I find disgusting. I have been a passenger in 8 different car accidents and never sued anyone. Yes I have neck/back injuries and the car insurance paid my bills for awhile. Although, now I have to see a chiropractor monthly to manage it. It’s been a ongoing expense for me. Only one person was negligent and that was a drunk guy. I would have sued but a doctor’s son let his friend drive the truck so it didn’t feel right. I was mostly injured from that accident and not the other little fender benders.

[joeea]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiger8693 You know, there's not always someone/company to be blamed. Of course, in this case there is.... the shooter. Attorneys know they can go for the deep pockets and make everyone "feel better" by getting to blame someone. Oh, and make themselves rich in the process.

The MGM attorneys could have concluded that they wouldn't be blamed by a jury. Apparently they thought about it and chose a settlement instead.

Maybe MGM will improve their security now.

[travelover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Teacher Terry ......... I have been a passenger in 8 different car accidents........

If you ever need a ride - don't call me.

[Just_Steve]

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeea The MGM attorneys could have concluded that they wouldn't be blamed by a jury. Apparently they thought about it and chose a settlement instead. Maybe MGM will improve their security now.

Maybe they will subcontract the TSA, never can be to careful.

[aaronc879]

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeea The MGM attorneys could have concluded that they wouldn't be blamed by a jury. Apparently they thought about it and chose a settlement instead. Maybe MGM will improve their security now.

Do you want to be patted down, go thru metal detector, and have your luggage checked everytime you enter the hotel. I don't and don't think most people would. What else could they do?

[GrayHare]

It could be the hotel has some level of negligence. I have no information to suggest this, but am considering it merely a possibility. For example maybe the shooter shows up on their security videos with a bellboy rolling a pile of automatic weapons and ammo up to his room via a hotel cart.

[Aerides]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrayHare It could be the hotel has some level of negligence. I have no information to suggest this, but am considering it merely a possibility.

Exactly. I think it's a fair assumption that none of us here know the real details, and the legal analysis behind the decision. The shooter probably had Do No Disturb on for multiple days - perhaps the hotel has some policy that they overrode for this person despite their guidelines. Maybe a key camera was out of action and not replaced. Maybe one of the employees reported something odd that was logged, but security never followed up. Maybe a million other things.

[HFWR]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting

Quote:

Often with the help of hotel bellhops, he brought five suitcases to his room on September 25, seven on the 26th, two on the 28th, six on the 30th, and two on October 1.