MGM Resorts International could pay $800 million to settle October 1 mass shooting lawsuits

LAS VEGAS — MGM Resorts International (MGMRI), the owners of the Mandalay Bay Hotel where gunman Stephen Paddock fired from his 32^ndfloor suite killing 58 people at the Route 91 Harvest music festival and wounding almost 500 others on October 1, 2017 might pay out up to $800 million to settle a mountain of lawsuits against the company.

According to MGMRI’s quarterly report filed with the US Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) on May 7 the company said that it has agreed to toll the statute of limitations to May 15, 2020, with respect to the claimants and that it was reasonably possible that continued mediation communications will result in a settlement with respect to the claimants of about $735 million, with the possibility that the amount of the settlement could reach $800 million.

MGMRI said that the company has $751 million of insurance coverage available to cover a settlement.

In the over 135 stories I have authored for the Baltimore Post-Examiner,I have consistently said that I believe the civil lawsuits filed against MGMRI by the victims would never see the light of day in a courtroom.

The odds are stacked against MGMRI in winning a court battle evident when the Baltimore Post-Examiner published our January 9 story, “Mock juries rule against MGM Resorts International Las Vegas in concert massacre, source says.”In that story, the Baltimore Post-Examiner reported that three independent mock civil juries all ruled against MGMRI and returned verdicts in favor of the victims.

Lawyers representing the plaintiffs could not be reached for comment.

Excerpt from the MGMRI SEC filing

The Company and/or certain of its subsidiaries have been named as defendants in a number of lawsuits related to the October 1, 2017 shooting in Las Vegas. The matters involve in large degree the same legal and factual issues, each case being filed on behalf of individuals who are seeking damages for emotional distress, physical injury, medical expenses, economic damages and/or wrongful death. Lawsuits were first filed in October 2017 and include actions originally filed in the District Court of Clark County, Nevada and in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, California. In June 2018, the Company removed to federal court all actions that remained pending in California and Nevada state courts. The Company also initiated declaratory relief actions in federal courts in various districts against individuals who had sued or stated an intent to sue. Additional lawsuits related to this incident may be filed in the future.

Since February of 2019, the Company and counsel representing plaintiffs in all pending matters and purporting to represent substantially all claimants known to the Company (collectively, the “Claimants”) have been, and continue to be, engaged in mediation efforts to resolve these matters. After multiple mediation sessions over several months, progress has been made, and while mediation is ongoing, the Company believes it is reasonably possible that a settlement will be reached. The related litigation is stayed pending mediation (the “Mediation Stay”) and the Company agreed to toll the statute of limitations to May 15, 2020, with respect to the Claimants. Although the Company continues to believe it is not legally responsible for the perpetrator’s criminal acts, in the interest of avoiding protracted litigation and the related impact on the community, the Company believes it is reasonably possible that continued mediation communications will result in a settlement with respect to the Claimants of approximately $735million, subject to and depending on obtaining a minimum level of participation with escalators based on greater participation increasing the amount payable up to $800million in the event of 100% participation. The Company has $751million of insurance coverage available to fund this potential settlement, which the Company’s insurers have agreed to fund. The Company intends for substantially all Claimants to be covered by the settlement; however, it remains possible that certain Claimants may not join the settlement and/or additional claims may be asserted. The foregoing determination was made in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, as codified in ASC 450-20, and is not an admission of any liability on the part of the Company or any of its affiliates.

If such a settlement is not consummated, the Mediation Stay will be lifted and the Company is currently unable to reliably predict the future developments in, outcome of, and economic costs and other consequences of any such litigation related to this matter. The Company will continue to investigate the factual and legal defenses, and evaluate these matters based on subsequent events, new information and future circumstances. The Company intends to defend against any such lawsuits and ultimately believes it should prevail, but litigation of this type is inherently unpredictable. Although there are significant procedural, factual and legal issues to be resolved that could significantly affect the Company’s belief as to the possibility of liability, the Company currently believes that it is reasonably possible that it could incur liability in connection with certain of these lawsuits. The foregoing determination was made in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, as codified in ASC 450-20, and is not an admission of any liability on the part of the Company or any of its affiliates. Given that these cases would be in the early stages, and in light of the uncertainties surrounding them, the Company does not currently possess sufficient information to determine a range of reasonably possible liability. The insurance carriers have not expressed a reservation of rights or coverage defense that affects the Company’s evaluation of potential losses in connection with these claims. The Company’s general liability insurance coverage provides, as part of the contractual “duty to defend”, payment of legal fees and associated costs incurred to defend covered lawsuits that are filed arising from the October 1, 2017 shooting in Las Vegas. Payment of such fees and costs is in addition to (and not limited by) the limits of the insurance policies and does not erode the total liability coverage available.

Doug Poppa

Doug authored over 135 articles on the October 1, 2017 Las Vegas Massacre, more than any other single journalist in the country. He investigates stories on corruption, law enforcement and crime. Doug is a US Army Military Police Veteran, former police officer, deputy sheriff and criminal investigator. Doug spent 20 years in the hotel/casino industry as an investigator and then as Director of Security and Surveillance. He also spent a short time with the US Dept. of Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration. In 1986 Doug was awarded Criminal Investigator of the Year by the Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office in Virginia for his undercover work in narcotics enforcement. In 1992 and 1993 Doug testified in court that a sheriff’s office official and the county prosecutor withheld exculpatory evidence during the 1988 trial of a man accused of the attempted murder of his wife. Doug’s testimony led to a judge’s decision to order the release of the man from prison in 1992 and awarded him a new trial, in which he was later acquitted. As a result of Doug breaking the police “blue wall of silence,” he was fired by the county sheriff. His story was featured on Inside Edition, Current Affair and CBS News’ “Street Stories with Ed Bradley”. In 1992 after losing his job, at the request of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Doug infiltrated a group of men who were plotting the kidnapping of a Dupont fortune heir and his wife. Doug has been a guest on national television and radio programs speaking on the stories he now writes as an investigative journalist. Catch Doug’s Podcast: @dougpoppa1