{"id":1514,"date":"2017-11-21T12:09:38","date_gmt":"2017-11-21T12:09:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legitgambling.com\/news\/?p=1514"},"modified":"2017-12-14T18:14:35","modified_gmt":"2017-12-14T18:14:35","slug":"nevada-supreme-court-ruling-strengthen-lawsuits-mgm-resorts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legitgambling.com\/news\/nevada-supreme-court-ruling-strengthen-lawsuits-mgm-resorts\/","title":{"rendered":"Lawsuits Against MGM Resorts Could Be Strengthen After Nevada Ruling"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"Lawsuits have been piling up against MGM Resorts International<\/strong> after the October 1 mass shooting, where a lone shooter rained fire on 22,000 concertgoers from his Mandalay Bay suite<\/a>. Many of the lawsuits are hinged on the assumption that MGM Resorts should take responsibility over the damages and lost lives because of its negligence to foresee the event, and its failure to respond to the events in a timely manner.<\/p>\n

Litigators are expecting a long and arduous legal process. But a Nevada Supreme Court decision made soon after the October 1 shooting that might have turned the tides in favour of those suing MGM. The Supreme Court ruling stemmed from a case filed<\/a> against another MGM company, New York-New York<\/strong>. In 2010, couple Carey Humphries and Lorenzo Rocha were assaulted inside the casino and a lower Nevada court ruled that the MGM could not have had knowledge that the attack would happen.<\/p>\n

That decision was appealed and the Supreme Court overturned the ruling in a 2-1 decision a few days before the Mandalay Bay shooting. While Justice Kristina Pickering<\/strong> dissented, Justices James Hardesty and Ron Parraguirre<\/strong> ruled that the attack should have been foreseeable since they found evidence that showed attacks and fights were happening at the resort thrice a week.<\/p>\n

Las Vegas Review-Journal<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n