Lawyers of many of the victims of the infamous 2017 Las Vegas Massacre assailed the decision of the owners of Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino in Las Vegas to sue the victims to make it easier to prove its claim it can't be held liable for the massacre under an existing federal legislation.
The complaint by MGM Resorts International, owner of the Mandalay Bay, seeks to have their cases moved to federal court, and is counting on a 2002 federal act to provide MGM with more protection.
MGM Resorts argues it cannot be held liable for Oct. 1 deaths, injuries or other damages. Its complaint said any claims against MGM "must be dismissed."
"Plaintiffs have no liability of any kind to defendants," said the complaint.
MGM Resorts sued hundreds of victims of the horrific mass murder committed by Stephen Paddock on Oct 1, 2017, that killed 58 people and injured 851 others in a plot to avoid litigating thousands of lawsuits individually. The Las Vegas massacre is the worst mass shooting in modern American history.
The company continues to insist it isn't at fault for the massacre in the first place, citing the 2002 federal act called the "Support Anti-Terrorism by Fostering Effective Technologies", or Safety Act. This law protects corporations in the event of mass attacks committed on U.S. soil, but only if security services certified by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) were deployed.
MGM claims it met the requirements of the Safety Act. It said it hired Contemporary Services Corporation (CSC), a security vendor for the concert whose services were certified by the DHS.
Since they hired CSC, MGM wants the cases moved from state courts to federal courts where it can litigate under the liability protection of the Safety Act. Legal experts said MGM's maneuver seeks to make it far easier for the company to fight the more than 2,000 that have been brought or will soon be brought against it.
Lawyers for the victims were outraged by this condemnable move.
MGM's complaint was described as "reprehensible" by Robert Eglet, whose Las Vegas law firm represents a large number of victims of the shooting. "They didn't have to take this overly aggressive outrageous situation where they're victimizing these people now twice," said Eglet.
"This is the first time that we're aware of that anyone has raised the Safety Act and tried to basically get out of responsibility for their negligence by trying to use the Safety Act."
Eglet also said the grounds of the litigation are "obscure."
"I've never seen a more outrageous thing, where they sue the victims in an effort to find a judge they like," he said. "It's just really sad that they would stoop to this level."
