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

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The legal system was never going to "make an example out of Bertuzzi", it was always going to rule within the confines of the law, so next year or seven years ago won't matter from that perspective. In some respects, it may strengthen Moore's case, since he obviously never played again, and if doctors will testify to continuing symptoms, well...

Of course, part of the reason why this has taken so long are things like the secret deal Bertuzzi and Orca Bay fought very hard to keep private. Until things like that resolved, the main trial couldn't go forward.

The article says though, that the jury can award any amount in a settlement. The law might dictate whether or not they have to pay compensation, but the jury will decide how much. I think the outrage in the general public has subsided quite a bit since the events. I would wager that far more people are less outraged now, which changes the potential jury decision. Heck, it's possible some of the jurors won't even be old enough to have a good recollection of the events when they happened. I think this is why the Orca Bay side has been delaying so much.

A lot of the public opinion is based on news released from the Moore camp right now and people seem to be awarding settlements based on those reports. The other side is going to have their own set of experts, and some of those are also bound to influence the jury in their favour a little.

I personally don't care one way or the other how much Moore gets (it doesn't effect me at all). I'm just not accepting everything they say as gospel either. I was probably one of the most outraged people around here when the incident happened.

[Clever_Iggy]

Posters should review general tort law, "but, for" language, and even egg-shell plaintiff doctrine before guessing that Bertuzzi et al won't be found liable.

The question is only about damages. Bertuzzi et al will argue that Moore's career was as a fringe NHler, cite average career length and extrapolate from there. It will be interesting.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

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...

Before their low-ball offer, Moore was actually asking for $60 million according to one of the links posted earlier.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by blankall

Well firstly, the hot coffee at McDonalds issue was not a laughable matter. That lady required several skin grafts, had third degree burns to much of her body, and was in the hospital for weeks.

Saw a nice little mini-doc on this a few days ago. While I think there are still way too many frivolous lawsuits in the US, this one did seem pretty justified.

http://www.nytimes.com/video/us/1000...ews-media.html

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

A lot of the public opinion is based on news released from the Moore camp right now and people seem to be awarding settlements based on those reports. The other side is going to have their own set of experts, and some of those are also bound to influence the jury in their favour a little.

What will their experts challenge?

If anything, the passage of time has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Todd Bertuzzi's assault ended Moore's career. The passage of time also shows that Moore has suffered long-term, ongoing issues as a result of Todd Bertuzzi's assault. It will be pretty damn difficult for Bertuzzi's camp to attack that.

Now or then, an unreasonable decision by the jury will be appealed. This will still be a matter of rule of law, not wanting to make an example of one side or another.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

What will their experts challenge?

If anything, the passage of time has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Todd Bertuzzi's assault ended Moore's career. The passage of time also shows that Moore has suffered long-term, ongoing issues as a result of Todd Bertuzzi's assault. It will be pretty damn difficult for Bertuzzi's camp to attack that.

Now or then, an unreasonable decision by the jury will be appealed. This will still be a matter of rule of law, not wanting to make an example of one side or another.

I'm sure they will look into his medical history for one to see if he ever had head injuries in the past. Being a hockey player, there is a pretty good chance he has had concussions (diagnosed and otherwise). They will probably find experts that will state that Moore's condition now has other contributing factors. They will probably have a lot of questions about his current medical condition. They might bring up that he was offered a contract after the injury and turned it down, bringing into question his intent to resume his career. I realize it was Burke that offered it to him, but I don't recall it being contingent on him not suing if he accepted.

Honestly, I don't know what kind of questions they are going to raise, but it would be foolish to think that they don't have some type of arguments. They certainly aren't going to just roll over as soon as it goes to court. Right or wrong, they are going to have the best lawyers and lawyers are pretty good at these things.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

They might bring up that he was offered a contract after the injury and turned it down, bring into question his intent to resume his career. I realize it was Burke that offered it to him, but I don't recall it being contingent on him not suing if he accepted.

No, but him accepting a contract would seriously hinder his argument for the damages he's seeking which is almost surely why Burke made the offer.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by opendoor

No, but him accepting a contract would seriously hinder his argument for the damages he's seeking which is almost surely why Burke made the offer.

How so?

If he accepted, but then was still never cleared to play, I would think that would have helped is cause more than anything. I'm sure Burke offered it knowing full well he would not accept it.

[Cuz]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Saw a nice little mini-doc on this a few days ago. While I think there are still way too many frivolous lawsuits in the US, this one did seem pretty justified.

http://www.nytimes.com/video/us/1000...ews-media.html

I recommend this little mini-doc too. It corrected many misconceptions I had about the case.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

They might bring up that he was offered a contract after the injury and turned it down, bringing into question his intent to resume his career. I realize it was Burke that offered it to him, but I don't recall it being contingent on him not suing if he accepted.

No, but anyone with an IQ of 1 should realize that was a self-serving action on Burke's part and not a genuine offer to a player genuinely expected to be able to play. If anything, it only argues malice on Burke's part.

[taxbuster]

Not mentioned in this thread are some aggravating circumstances: the possibility of showing negligent behaviour in several ways - eg. Crawford's alleged "instructions" to the team before the game and Bertuzzi ignoring what may be cast as an already inflamed situation (contributory to the sucker punch, the dogpile and the resulting injury).

Once negligence is proven, liability follows pretty quickly and without much defence.

I suspect what will happen is that it will be settled during the course of the trial as Bert, the Canucks et al discover that they are losing. The cheques will come out then and we likely will never know the amount.

That's generally the way it's done unless one or the other party is stupidly stubborn.

[Violator]

Pretty sure this is the second or third lawsuit.Bertuzzi signed an a agreement years ago with Orca Bay saying and judgment against him would be covered by the Canucks.