10 years later: Steve Moore's civil suit against Todd Bertuzzi set to go to trial

[Geeoff]

Even though this story is about how ####ty the Canucks organization is, I just can't bring myself to care about it anymore.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

I'm guessing that Moore gets nothing. I have not seen anything that shows any reason to believe that the major injury was not sustained in the pileup. A gloved hand punch to the helmet of a player on the move isn't going to cause the injury. IMO, what everyone claims to be Bertuzzi driving moores head into the ice, is much more likely to be Bertuzzi trying to grab Moore after the punch, but Moore stumbled/was falling enough to bring Bertuzzi off balance and fall on top of Moore, and just had his hands in an awkward place. Since what I'm describing would look very similar to the more common belief, the trouble is proving it either way. If Bertuzzi says he just lost Balance, you simply don't have any evidence to refute it. After that, you have the pile on, which almost certainly where the neck injury happened, that or Bertuzzi falling awkwardly on top of Moore.

For Moore to get anything, you might have to prove both Bertuzzi's intent, and the point of the worst injury to Moore, very certainly one of those. Frankly, I don't see evidence of either thing being possible.

I think you have a really funny interpretation of what happened. ITs pretty clear that Bertuzzi wasn't trying to hold Moore up, he pretty much put all of his weight on Moore's back. Moore was also out like a light from the punch from behind by Bertuzzi. It was the perfect sucker punch. If you take it even further from the front view after the fall, it looks like Bertuzzi was bringing his arm back for another punch.

The dog pile might have actually saved Moore's life.

On top of it, Bertuzzi caused the incident which caused the incident the judge will probably look at the dog pile as irrelevant.

I don't think there's any way that Moore doesn't get a pretty substantial judgement in this case, especially when they show Bertuzzi's interview after the Moore hit on Naslund and that this attack by Bertuzzi didn't happen until a few games later, which can almost make an argument for intent. As well as the stalking actions during the game.

Bertuzzi should have made a serious attempt to settle instead of slapping Moore in the face with his ridiculous offer.

Even if a jury looks at Bertuzzi's balance sheet which should be ridiculous due to his 40 mil earned in his career, they might be inclined to punish Bert but not destroy him by coming back with a 10 million dollar (1/4 of Bert's value) in judgement.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by blankall

You only need to prove intent towards the action, not the outcome. Bertuzzi clearly intended to punch Moore. From that point on, unless you can prove that what happened next was either too unforseeable or too remote, anything beyond that point flows from the punch.

I bet Moore gets a large pay day.

Very true. However, I'd argue that the type of punch that Bertuzzi gave to Moore - without warning, from behind, and with a gloved hand to a helmet - happens many times over the course of a season. In fact, I remember a Flames player receiving a very similar punch in a game about a week later.

You have the "premeditation", but were they just saying Moore had to "answer the bell?" That's almost certainly what they meant. Likewise, Bertuzzi's intent likely iwas also only to make Moore "answer the bell" and nothing else.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by blankall

You only need to prove intent towards the action, not the outcome. Bertuzzi clearly intended to punch Moore. From that point on, unless you can prove that what happened next was either too unforseeable or too remote, anything beyond that point flows from the punch.

I bet Moore gets a large pay day.

I would think it would be fairly easy to prove that the rest was unforseeable, there is no way that any of what injured Moore was done by intent. I mean, call me crazy, but if Bertuzzi can give a guy a severe concussion, a tear in his frontal lobe, and break a few vertebrae with one errant punch, then he's clearly in the wrong profession.

I don't know a heck of a lot about the legal side, but I know that it's pretty clear that Bertuzzi did not intend to injure Moore the way he did. It happened on the ice, and it ended Moore's career, but I'm not sure how it's still a viable lawsuit. Dany Heatley killed Dan Snyder by driving like a fool, killed him, not made his life hard, killed him, and would he have owed the Snyder family tens of millions of dollars? Hard to say really.

I don't believe Moore is owed 38 million dollars. I believe he is owed his medical expenses, certainly, perhaps some compensation on top of that, but I don't see where the 38 million is created.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Very true. However, I'd argue that the type of punch that Bertuzzi gave to Moore - without warning, from behind, and with a gloved hand to a helmet - happens many times over the course of a season. In fact, I remember a Flames player receiving a very similar punch in a game about a week later.

You have the "premeditation", but were they just saying Moore had to "answer the bell?" That's almost certainly what they meant. Likewise, Bertuzzi's intent likely iwas also only to make Moore "answer the bell" and nothing else.

Ah he had already answered the bell though, he was challenged by and fought Cooke earlier in the game. Its not his obligation to fight everyone in the Canucks lineup. By the simplest definition of the hockey code, his debt was settled.

And watch Moore after the punch, he was out cold that's not a action that happens many times over the course of a season. In fact I can only recall a few sucker punches like that in the 30 years that I've watched hockey. There was nothing ordinary about it.

In fact the suspension by the NHL and the criminal plead removes that whole ordinary part of hockey argument completely.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Very true. However, I'd argue that the type of punch that Bertuzzi gave to Moore - without warning, from behind, and with a gloved hand to a helmet - happens many times over the course of a season. In fact, I remember a Flames player receiving a very similar punch in a game about a week later.

I would argue your argument is out to lunch. But please, start showing examples.

You have the "premeditation", but were they just saying Moore had to "answer the bell?" That's almost certainly what they meant. Likewise, Bertuzzi's intent likely iwas also only to make Moore "answer the bell" and nothing else.

Several problems with this: First, most "answer the bell" situations are in the heat of the immediate moment, or later in the same game at most. The Canucks waited two weeks and two meetings, which argues to premeditation.

Second, Moore already answered the bell in the first period of that game when he fought Matt Cooke. The fact that Bertuzzi subsequently went after Moore argues that the Canucks organization was, in fact, out to cause injury. IMO, that wouldn't change Bertuzzi's liability too much since he's already on the hook for his proven actions, but it doesn't help Crawfrord or Orca Bay any.

[GirlySports]

The canucks were too gutless to attack Moore in Colorado.

they needed to do it at home 2 weeks later.

the game in between the naslund injury and the moore injury was a brilliant 6-5 game.

it should have ended there

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by strombad

I would think it would be fairly easy to prove that the rest was unforseeable, there is no way that any of what injured Moore was done by intent. I mean, call me crazy, but if Bertuzzi can give a guy a severe concussion, a tear in his frontal lobe, and break a few vertebrae with one errant punch, then he's clearly in the wrong profession.

I don't know a heck of a lot about the legal side, but I know that it's pretty clear that Bertuzzi did not intend to injure Moore the way he did. It happened on the ice, and it ended Moore's career, but I'm not sure how it's still a viable lawsuit. Dany Heatley killed Dan Snyder by driving like a fool, killed him, not made his life hard, killed him, and would he have owed the Snyder family tens of millions of dollars? Hard to say really.

I don't believe Moore is owed 38 million dollars. I believe he is owed his medical expenses, certainly, perhaps some compensation on top of that, but I don't see where the 38 million is created.

Bertuzzi's intent, whether he intended to injure him severely or not is irrelevant, his actions are relevant. However again, Bertuzzi's interview after the game where Naslund got hit does point to intent.

The broken next, torn frontal lobe etc were caused by Bertuzi's actions,

What your saying is if I aim a gun at someone and it goes off because I accidentally pull the trigger and kill the person I should get off scott free because I didn't intend to shoot the person.

On top of that, Moore's injuries are going to be considered to be debilitating and effect his ability to work at jobs that he was university trained for. Please read the article I posted earlier. So not only was his NHL income ended, but his earning potential for the future is compromised. He will get a lot more then medical expenses and small damages if his lawyer does his job right.

You could argue that if he played 5 more years in the NHL at a below NHL salary of $1 million which would be 5 million. Then he turned his NHL career and Harvard degree into a minimum of a $200,000 per year income which is what Harvard grads get paid minimum for lets say 30 years. $6,000,000. Add then together to get to $11,000,000. Then add on things like interest.

I doubt he'll get $38 million, which is a number probably pulled from the air. But I would bet he gets between 10 and 15 million from the Canucks and Bertuzzi.

[nik-]

Honestly, if he gets any more than a few million I'd be floored.

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by nik-

Honestly, if he gets any more than a few million I'd be floored.

What's a few? Without following the case too closely, I'd wager heavily that he gets more than 5. I'd wager moderately he gets more than 10. I'd be comfortable betting that he hits 12 - 15. Beyond that, with a jury more is still possible.

This is not just about his potential NHL earnings. Doctors have submitted reports saying he had a 140 IQ and has lost his ability to use that IQ in a sustained manner, so the argument goes, he could have been a high paid executive as well, but no more.

And its not really a case of it he gets an award. Its about how much but even more, from whom.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Bertuzzi's intent, whether he intended to injure him severely or not is irrelevant, his actions are relevant. However again, Bertuzzi's interview after the game where Naslund got hit does point to intent.

The broken next, torn frontal lobe etc were caused by Bertuzi's actions,

What your saying is if I aim a gun at someone and it goes off because I accidentally pull the trigger and kill the person I should get off scott free because I didn't intend to shoot the person.

On top of that, Moore's injuries are going to be considered to be debilitating and effect his ability to work at jobs that he was university trained for. Please read the article I posted earlier. So not only was his NHL income ended, but his earning potential for the future is compromised. He will get a lot more then medical expenses and small damages if his lawyer does his job right.

You could argue that if he played 5 more years in the NHL at a below NHL salary of $1 million which would be 5 million. Then he turned his NHL career and Harvard degree into a minimum of a $200,000 per year income which is what Harvard grads get paid minimum for lets say 30 years. $6,000,000. Add then together to get to $11,000,000. Then add on things like interest.

I doubt he'll get $38 million, which is a number probably pulled from the air. But I would bet he gets between 10 and 15 million from the Canucks and Bertuzzi.

Just so you're aware, that exact situation actually exists, and if you are holding a gun and it accidentally goes off and kills someone, you could very well get off. It's called "accidental killing" and as long as you are not committing a crime or intending to commit a crime, then the homicide itself is not considered a crime.

So this, obviously, is not what I was saying. Bertuzzi committed the crime of assault. He was punished by law for that crime. I'm simply saying that proving him to be financially responsible to Moore is different than proving Bertuzzi to be guilty of a crime. He's guilty, that's over. The rest is far trickier.

I, like you, believe he's probably going to get somewhere to the tune of 10 million or so.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by nik-

Honestly, if he gets any more than a few million I'd be floored.

I would too, but that is likely the point of the $38 million. I can think of several potential arguments for why that figure was picked, and most don't contradict others:
1. That is legitimately what they feel his injuries are worth (both lost earnings potential + punitive, etc.)
2. As a rebuttal to NHL/Orca Bay's insulting offer; that he highballed as much as they lowballed.
3. As a prelude to negotiating a settlement. Neither side would start with their best offer. Of course, it turned out that there really was no middle ground to negotiate to, which is why we end up at trial.


And FWIW, I don't expect that Moore gets $10 million either. If Bertuzzi's assault occurred in Denver, then yes, absolutely. But as already noted, the Canadian system is much less likely to result in giant payouts. I do expect that they will be pushing hard on the idea that he could have played 5-10 more years and given what third line forwards make...

[flylock shox]

I think Bertuzzi's pooched.

The criminal conviction is going to be a major problem for him as his lawyers argue issue estoppel or perhaps abuse of process if he attempts to argue Moore consented to the hit via his participation in the hockey game. So he'll likely lose on the assault issue right away.

He may try to concentrate his argument on causation, but I think he's done for there too. No one looking at that video is likely to come to any other conclusion but that Moore's injuries were most likely caused by the punch and/or the subsequent collapse to the ice. The dog pile is a red herring.

The damages assessment could be interesting, as so much of Moore's future earnings were uncertain. But just looking at league averages for a guy like him, you're in the multiple-million dollar range. Then there's non-pecs and aggravated damages, which could be good for another couple hundred thousand. There could be a decent cost of future care claim as well I suppose - but really, it's the earnings loss that makes the claim.

Bertuzzi's just lucky he didn't do this in Colorado. That could have increased damages tenfold.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by strombad

Just so you're aware, that exact situation actually exists, and if you are holding a gun and it accidentally goes off and kills someone, you could very well get off. It's called "accidental killing" and as long as you are not committing a crime or intending to commit a crime, then the homicide itself is not considered a crime.

Going off topic, but in Captain's exact scenario, the shooter would almost certainly be convicted of manslaughter at least. A more appropriate example of what you are referring to would be a hunting accident.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by fotze

Why does no one ever answer this? This must have been stated over 7 billion times on this very board but the poster who makes the original dog crap argument, never replies to this very point. NEVER EVER!!!

Most Canuck fans who still defend Bertuzzi argue that Cooke doesn't count because Cooke is a pansy. I'm not even kidding. They basically prove the mindset in Vancouver that serious injury was the only acceptable result for them.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Going off topic, but in Captain's exact scenario, the shooter would almost certainly be convicted of manslaughter at least. A more appropriate example of what you are referring to would be a hunting accident.

No, even involuntary manslaughter involves illegal activity. None of that situation was a crime, so that's why it falls under accidental killing and not manslaughter. But you're right, off topic, I just wanted to make it clear.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Delgar

What's a few? Without following the case too closely, I'd wager heavily that he gets more than 5. I'd wager moderately he gets more than 10. I'd be comfortable betting that he hits 12 - 15. Beyond that, with a jury more is still possible.

This is not just about his potential NHL earnings. Doctors have submitted reports saying he had a 140 IQ and has lost his ability to use that IQ in a sustained manner, so the argument goes, he could have been a high paid executive as well, but no more.

And its not really a case of it he gets an award. Its about how much but even more, from whom.

If he gets more than 3 million, I'd be incredibly surprised.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by nik-

If he gets more than 3 million, I'd be incredibly surprised.

I think your going to look like Maccually Culkin when the verdict comes down

[nemanja2306]

If the court awards say $10M in favour of Moore, how much of that 10 mill pays Bertuzzi and how much Canucks/NHL?

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by nemanja2306

If the court awards say $10M in favour of Moore, how much of that 10 mill pays Bertuzzi and how much Canucks/NHL?

They will be "jointly and severally liable", which means you don't apportion percentages of it to each, but that you can collect all from anyone. Essentially, you collect from the deepest pockets/the one easiest to collect from. Here, that's the Canucks.
If they wanted to, they could try to collect all or any from anyone, but usually you just go to the deepest pockets.