MGM Loses Bid to Coordinate Las Vegas Shooting Lawsuits
The cases include nine lawsuits MGM filed against 2,000 victims of the shooting.
October 04, 2018 at 03:34 PM
5 minute read
MGM lost its bid to send lawsuits over last year's mass shooting in Las Vegas to a single federal judge.
In an order on Wednesday, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation refused to coordinate four lawsuits filed against MGM over the shooting and nine cases that MGM filed against the victims seeking declaratory relief that it wasn't liable for injuries or deaths. MGM's lawsuits struck an immediate backlash, both on social media for targeting the shooting's victims and from plaintiffs lawyers who accused the company of forum shopping.
The panel also noted that, although MGM predicted as many as 22,000 victims could sue, there are just three federal lawsuits in California and one in Nevada.
“There also is significant overlap among counsel in these actions,” wrote MDL Panel Chairwoman Sarah Vance in the order. “At this point, voluntary cooperation and coordination among the small number of parties and involved courts appears feasible. We encourage the parties to employ various alternatives to transfer which may minimize the potential for duplicative discovery and inconsistent pretrial rulings in this litigation.”
Additionally, the panel said the plaintiffs planned to pursue their cases in Nevada state court, rendering any MDL moot.
Plaintiffs lawyers Robert Eglet of Las Vegas-based Eglet Prince, who argued against an MDL at last week's oral arguments in San Francisco, noted that the panel took just three days to make its decision.
“That's a very significant message being sent to MGM and their lawyers that this attempt at forming an MDL was a rouse and a fraud, and the court saw right through it, and that's why they denied their motion,” he said.
MGM spokesman Brian Ahern wrote in an email: “We respect the panel's decision and will continue to litigate our motions in the courts where the actions are pending.”
A representative for concert promoter Live Nation, which joined MGM's coordination motion, did not respond to a request for comment.
On Oct. 1, 2017, Stephen Paddock was a guest on the 32nd floor of the MGM's Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino hotel, where he stockpiled an arsenal of weapons used to fire at concertgoers at the Route 91 Harvest Festival. He killed 58 people and injured hundreds.
In addition to the cases before the MDL panel, other lawsuits are pending in state courts, primarily in Nevada. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, along with Eglet, also filed a class action against bump stock manufacturer Slide Fire Solutions. Slide Fire makes devices that Paddock used to convert his rifles into fully automatic weapons. On Sept. 17, Nevada Chief U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro granted Slide Fire's dismissal of that case, concluding that it sold a “component part,” and not just an “accessory,” as defined under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which shields firearm manufacturers from liability.
“We're evaluating what we're going to do,” Eglet said. “We're going to file an amended complaint, but we're also considering an appeal of the court's order.”
In July, MGM's lawyers, Brad Brian and Michael Doyen of Munger, Tolles & Olson in Los Angeles, filed its suits in Nevada, California, Texas, New York, Florida, Arizona, Utah and Alaska. The suits are declaratory actions against 1,977 victims who sued or threatened to sue MGM for failing to provide security that would have prevented the shooting.
In what many experts called a novel move, MGM cited the Support Anti-Terrorism by Fostering Effective Technologies Act of 2002, or SAFETY Act, passed in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to encourage development of security technologies certified by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
MGM insisted that the SAFETY Act warranted coordinating all the cases in federal court.
The MDL panel said that wasn't enough.
“The declaratory judgment actions do not, on their own, present sufficiently numerous or complex common questions of fact to merit centralization,” Vance wrote.
On Wednesday, the MDL panel granted transfer requests in other cases, including:
- 140 lawsuits that Denmark's taxing authority, the Customs and Tax Administration of the Kingdom of Denmark, or SKAT, filed against various pension funds to recoup $2.1 billion in an alleged tax fraud scheme. The panel sent the cases to U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan in the Southern District of New York. Kaplan, who was SKAT's top pick, is one of seven judges on the MDL panel. The order says he took no part in the decision.
- 28 lawsuits brought over alleged defects in Zimmer M/L Taper hip implants. The panel sent the cases to U.S. District Judge Paul Crotty in the Southern District of New York, who is presiding over one of the first cases. The panel noted that the “representations made by counsel at oral argument left us with considerable doubt concerning the parties' cooperative efforts to date.”
- A dozen price-fixing lawsuits filed against various makers of methylene diphenyl diisocyanate and toluene diisocyanate, including Bayer Corp. and The Dow Chemical Co. Both are compounds used in polyurethane products such as mattresses, insulation, clothing and paint. The panel sent those cases to U.S. District Judge Donetta Ambrose in the Western District of Pennsylvania.
- 17 lawsuits filed by personal injury law firms and other businesses alleging Tribune Media Company, Sinclair Broadcast Group Inc. and major broadcasters conspired to fix prices for TV advertising. The panel sent those cases to U.S. District Judge Virginia Kendall in the Northern District of Illinois.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllThe Right Amount?: Federal Judge Weighs $1.8M Attorney Fee Request with Strip Club's $15K Award
Kline & Specter and Bosworth Resolve Post-Settlement Fighting Ahead of Courtroom Showdown
6 minute read12-Partner Team 'Surprises' Atlanta Firm’s Leaders With Exit to Launch New Reed Smith Office
4 minute readMorgan Lewis Shutters Shenzhen Office Less Than Two Years After Launch
Trending Stories
- 1Critical Mass With Law.com’s Amanda Bronstad: LA Judge Orders Edison to Preserve Wildfire Evidence, Is Kline & Specter Fight With Thomas Bosworth Finally Over?
- 2What Businesses Need to Know About Anticipated FTC Leadership Changes
- 3Federal Court Considers Blurry Lines Between Artist's Consultant and Business Manager
- 4US Judge Cannon Blocks DOJ From Releasing Final Report in Trump Documents Probe
- 5White & Case KOs Claims Against Voltage Inc. in Solar Companies' Trade Dispute
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250