Pulse nightclub lawsuits polarize attorneys

In the days and weeks after the Pulse nightclub attack, calls trickled into Mark nejame’s law office in downtown Orlando.

Some of those affected by the shooting asked about a possible lawsuit. His employees ran the cases by him, but as soon as they mentioned a suit against the club, he cut them off with an adamant “no.”

“I think someone could make an argument for a suit, but that’s not going to be me,” he said. “Personally, I find it repulsive, the thought of profiting in any way, shape or form from this tragedy.”

nejame isn’t the only lawyer rejecting potential clients. Other prominent Central Florida attorneys have steered clear of lawsuits against the Orlando nightclub, where 49 people were killed by a gunman in June and at least 68 others were injured.

They say the One-Orlando Fund, which raised nearly $30 million for the victims in the shooting, has met the financial needs of victims, and it would be difficult to prove negligence in the attack.

But other firms have agreed to represent those affected in the shooting and say their clients want justice, creating a split in the legal community.

Rulon Munns of Bogin, Munns & Munns said his firm is representing the family of at least one victim and has gotten several inquires from others.

“Our position is the same as it is on all legal matters. We look at it on a case-bycase basis and see if a case has merit, and if it does, we will certainly continue forward,” he said.

A few families of the victims have retained lawyers.

Texas lawyer Bob Hilliard is representing the families of Pulse victims Juan Martinez and Miguel Honorato and plans to file a suit against the manufacturers of gunman Omar Mateen’s weapons, Sig Sauer, Inc. and Glock Inc.

On Oct. 14 a judge dismissed a lawsuit by families against the manufacturer of the gun used in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting massacre, citing a federal law that generally shields gun makers from criminal use of their products.

Survivors also seem split on the issue. Chris Littlestar, 25, was looking for legal help as he filled out his claim for the One Orlando Fund, which was created to compensate victims and their families. He went to a few firms for help, including nejame Law and Morgan & Morgan.

“They said because they donated to Pulse they can’t represent anyone ... It’s also probably because no one wants to take that case because it’d be so damaging,” he said.

Morgan & Morgan did not return calls seeking comment.

Littlestar, who was shot five times inside the club, said he doesn’t plan on suing and was only seeking help with the claim.

“I think it’s time to move forward. I don’t think it’s going to help anyone or get them anywhere by suing because there was only so much security could have done,” he said.

Miguel Leiva, 29, was shot twice inside the club. He said between the ongoing bills and therapy some survivors may need, money from the One Orlando Fund may not be enough. Experts agree it could pose a problem, but Leiva said he does not plan on suing.

“I mean, it sounds like a lot when you say $20 [million] or $30 million, but there were so many of us who were affected. I can see why some might be looking into it,” he said.

Mark O’Mara, who heads O’Mara Law Firm in Orlando, said he’s gotten a handful of inquiries, but does not intend to get involved.

“While there is an opportunity to step in, I think it’s a much better idea to work in collaboration with the community and help the victims and survivors through the fund,” he said. “Don’t get me wrong, I’m a gladiator, but I do believe in bad karma.”

Nejame, who owns several nightclubs in Orlando, said it would have been hard to stop a “mentally disturbed terrorist” who had a death wish.

“It’s not like Pulse was known as a place of violence where they would have needed more security. They were known as a peaceful place for people to go and hang out and dance,” he said. “How do you, as a business owner, anticipate something like this? Should there be armed guards at every corner?”

He said a suit would cause backlash and “a division in the community.”

That division was evident last month when a survivor filed a lawsuit asking for an audit of the fund before cash was handed out. A judge denied the request, but the fund is planning to do an audit anyway. Some commenters on Facebook called the victim greedy, while others agreed an audit was needed.

Munns said his firm never shies away from a difficult case, although he hasn’t decided whether to file a lawsuit.

“I don’t disagree that there will be some in the community that when they see a lawsuit rising out of this will think it’s in poor taste, but it’s really about what our firm thinks and what is in the best interest of our client,” Munns said.