The horrific events of October 1, 2017 stunned the country when a lone gunman fired into a crowd of outdoor concertgoers at the Route 91 festival. Many Georgia residents were among the more than 50 people killed, with hundreds more sustaining gunshot wounds or injuries from the panic that ensued. In trying to make sense out of a seemingly senseless event, many victims and their families looked to MGM Resorts International, the owner of Mandalay Bay where the concert took place and the perpetrator had a room from where the assault took place.

MGM’s response to the initial lawsuit was a countersuit seeking to be relieved of any liability for the incident. This resulted in a public outcry as many contend that MGM was at least partially responsible for the tragedy. Both sides have now agreed to suspend the pursuit of their respective actions and enter into mediation in an effort to resolve the matter.

The legal theory the plaintiffs’ initial lawsuit is based on is called premises liability. The owner or entity that controls a specific property is charged with the duty of ordinary care to maintain the premises such that no unreasonable risk of harm comes to those who enter. While attacks by third parties cannot be absolutely preventable, questions remain regarding whether there was inadequate security, proper protection in responding to the event and ultimately whether there was any negligence on behalf of MGM.

Premises liability is a form of a personal injury claim where negligence must be proved. A premises liability lawyer might be able to explain how inadequate security is often a factor in establishing the basic elements of the claim.

Source: Las Vegas Now, “MGM Resorts, plaintiffs agree to mediation in Las Vegas mass shooting case,” Vanessa Murphy, 10/29/2018