Steve Moore reaches settlement with Todd Bertuzzi

[EvilCoop]

50% to lawyers would be exceptionally high. Most contingency fee agreements are more in the range of 30%.

Also, under Canadian law, I don't think you pay income tax on a settlement as it is not employment income, but I could stand to be corrected on that.

Then I stand corrected, hopefully Moore enjoys the money.

 

[Yukon Joe]

Then I stand corrected, hopefully Moore enjoys the money.

Don't get me wrong - it is an exceptional case, so perhaps the contingency fee is as high as 50%, but it would be very unusual.

 

[Captain Mittens*]

Is Moore's lawyer really named Ted Danson?

That is kinda funny

 

[X8oD]

TSN's article is getting a bit longer:

Danson wrote in a text message that Mark Moore's comments were not accurate but he declined to elaborate.

"I am governed by very strict rules of professional conduct when it comes to settlement discussions," Danson wrote. "I am focusing only on my professional obligations."

 

[Rocko604]

Because that's prevented Bertuzzi from getting contracts for the last decade.

Only this time they have a trial start date. Can't see a team signing him if he's going to be in court throughout training camp.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

And the thing is this. If even following The Code a Super Heavyweight like Bertuzzi had no business going after a Middle Weight like Moore. Thats against The Code. Moore had already fought earlier, guy closer to his Class in Matt Cooke & faired well. Had he gotten a Black Eye or whatever then that wouldve likely been the end of it but no..... all stemming of course from an elbow on Naslund games earlier, who on a Scoring frenzy that season gets taken to the hospital with a concussion & misses 3 games. No penalty on the play to Steve Moore.

i'm not saying whether the code is right or wrong, but according to the code doesn't moore have to take whatever's coming to him if he injures a franchise player with a questionable/unnecessary hit?

i agree, the cooke fight maybe changes things a bit, but not completely. seems to me like it was extremely un-code-ly of moore to duck bertuzzi and may and brookbank and all of the many large gentlemen on the canucks who could actually pound him, only to then fight (and beat) a guy with only nine career fights who he had three inches on and act like he'd taken his lump?

 

[sandysan]

i'm not saying whether the code is right or wrong, but according to the code doesn't moore have to take whatever's coming to him if he injures a franchise player with a questionable/unnecessary hit?

i agree, the cooke fight maybe changes things a bit, but not completely. seems to me like it was extremely un-code-ly of moore to duck bertuzzi and may and brookbank and all of the many large gentlemen on the canucks who could actually pound him, only to then fight (and beat) a guy with only nine career fights who he had three inches on and act like he'd taken his lump?

my understanding of the code is the same as yours, if it is deemed you have taken liberties, you dont get to chose who you go with, specifically if you intend to chose a guy in, or below, your weight class.

 

[Killion]

i'm not saying whether the code is right or wrong, but according to the code doesn't moore have to take whatever's coming to him if he injures a franchise player with a questionable/unnecessary hit?

my understanding of the code is the same as yours, if it is deemed you have taken liberties, you dont get to chose who you go with, specifically if you intend to chose a guy in, or below, your weight class.

Old School Code when I played about 100yrs ago, no, you only fought in your Weight Class or one up or one down. The lines however blurred over the intervening years, fighting becoming as much a tactic as any kind of retaliatory or dispensation of street/ice justice if you will. That being said, Moore himself was no fighter however he did go with Cooke and that should have been the end of it win, lose or draw. Powder keg situation like that, 9-2 thrashing, forget The Code altogether is essentially what the Nucks did and that included the guy behind the bench.

 

[sandysan]

Old School Code when I played about 100yrs ago, no, you only fought in your Weight Class or one up or one down. The lines however blurred over the intervening years, fighting becoming as much a tactic as any kind of retaliatory or dispensation of street/ice justice if you will. That being said, Moore himself was no fighter however he did go with Cooke and that should have been the end of it win, lose or draw. Powder keg situation like that, 9-2 thrashing, forget The Code altogether is essentially what the Nucks did and that included the guy behind the bench.

There is not much of a deterrent if when answering the bell I'm even money, and none if I get to punch down. In fact in the latter case, my guess is the next guy that comes knocking it at least one wright class higher ( which kinda happened)

 

[neksys]

... If even following The Code a Super Heavyweight like Bertuzzi had no business going after a Middle Weight like Moore...

Not saying I disagree with your points, but Steve Moore was 6'2", 210lbs while Bertuzzi was 6'3", 225lbs.

This isn't exactly a David and Goliath situation. Bertuzzi was bigger and stronger but Moore was no weakling.

 

[Killion]

Not saying I disagree with your points, but Steve Moore was 6'2", 210lbs while Bertuzzi was 6'3", 225lbs. .. This isn't exactly a David and Goliath situation. Bertuzzi was bigger and stronger but Moore was no weakling.

Ya, they were close enough however there are nuances in terms of tenure in the league, status, a range of issues.... but were drifting OT. What happened happened. Its the fallout, the business issues were here to discuss. Its difficult though, granted, to not want to discuss those other issues as well as really its endemic to the sport, part of the culture on several levels & ever changing. Particularly so with the introduction of the Instigator Rule and reckless hits which can be career ending resulting in issues like this one with business, dollars & sense ramifications.... Sometimes The Code can be ignored and is, like if your a Super Heavy Weight & your dealing with a Matt Cooke or a Sean Avery type for example and they'd done whatever it is they usually did or do, or heck, even if their standing there and you just "think" they might do something.

 

[Viktri]

This article, Jan 2013, talks about what the Moore camp was saying at that time:

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/2268057-steve-moore-s-life-after-bertuzzi-a-secret-until-now/

The last bit seems to point to the case they would us for the post-NHL/Harvard grad earning potential:

I like how the judge assigns a low probability to the hedge fund marketer position - seems that the judge has done his research. People saying that Moore would be a banker because he's smart don't know the industry. It's a low probability event and it's likely Moore's lawyers broke it to him that he wasn't getting much more $$$.

 

[Fugu]

The judge didn't see it that way. That's why he was found guilty in criminal court. The judge found it was outside the normal risks of the game, and Bertuzzi and his lawyers never bothered to appeal. If they felt otherwise, I'm sure they wouldn't have accepted the decision. Bertuzzi's lawyer had to know that wouldn't look good, and put them at a huge disadvantage in the inevitable civil courts when Moore follows up by trying to sue Bert's pants off... which he did with the 68M lawsuit/claim.

A criminal conviction is a nail in the coffin if you know a civil trial is following, based on the amount of burden of proof required in each type of court. Criminal cases you need to be almost 100% certain the defendant is guilty (e.g 99.9% - beyond a reasonable doubt). In civil trials, you just need to be "more certain than not" (e.g. 51%) that the defendant was guilty. So if you're criminally guilty, it's really hard to not be guilty in a civil trial over the same incident.

<snip for brevity>
So - if Bertuzzi was found beyond any reasonable doubt of committing assault causing bodily harm, then it's essentially impossible for him to win as a defendant in a civil trial over the same incident.

I believe it depends upon how the settlement is structured. My understanding is the lost wage component may be taxable, while the damage component is not. Likely will need to have some type of judgment on accepting the breakdowns from the CRA in this case.

But a lawsuit is, in the end, only ever "about the money".

Here's just some informed speculation. Most jurisdiction have a system of formal offers to settle - the defendant formally offers the plaintiff X dollars. If the plaintiff wins at trial, but is awarded less than X dollars, suddenly it is the plaintiff who is responsible for all of the defendant's legal fees. And for a case that's gone on for 10 years, those would be enormous.

No matter how badly Moore might want to go to trial, if Bertuzzi and the Canucks offer enough money he'd practically be forced to settle.

I don't think there was ever a question that Bertuzzi, Crawford, et al. would be found responsible to some extent, but my understanding it that Canadian laws are quite different, and far more restrictive on the tort side of the equation, namely having limits on awards due to actual projected loss-- and not the unlimited damages/harm awards US juries seem to hand out. That's one reason Moore's camp initially tried to have the case heard in Colorado. The court there, and rightly so, claimed it lacked jurisdiction over an event that happened in Canada. BC laws were far more restrictive, iirc, so Moore filed in Ontario. I was somewhat surprised that the case could be filed in Ontario, and again due to the incident taking place in Vancouver.

Maybe some of our Canadian posters with legal backgrounds can shed some light on that paint.

Thus, Moore's side has to, realistically, show as much evidence as possible that Moore could have earned X amount, by whatever means, making that the crux of the award or settlement.

 

[Fugu]

The average salary in Canada is under $50k a year before taxes. Spltting his $6MM into 40 more working years would net $150k a year after taxes which is equivalent to around $230K before taxes . That would put him well inyo the top quintile of average family income. That's not middle class.

The average starting salary for a Harvard grad is $60k a year for comparisons sake. No idea what Moore's grades were like so I guess that's a best estimate.

Not just grades, but I'm sure the major taken also affects future earnings. For example, Accounting majors at the better state schools can start with $55-60K; and Engineering grads at $60 K+, depending on which track. Computer Software Engineers are getting $90K right out of school from the bigger West Coast employers.

That starting salary is an average after all, so as hard as it is to believe, there are Harvard grads who are getting far less than $60K.

I like how the judge assigns a low probability to the hedge fund marketer position - seems that the judge has done his research. People saying that Moore would be a banker because he's smart don't know the industry. It's a low probability event and it's likely Moore's lawyers broke it to him that he wasn't getting much more $$$.

Yes, some of the comparables being used are not very credible. All Harvard grads are on the Hedge Fund Manager track then? Or have the expectation of earnings that mirror it?

This isn't to belittle Moore's injuries, that he has lost the ability to earn a livelihood that would have set him up nicely, even with a shorter or average length NHL career. I think that's where it starts. It's hard to prove statistically that he would have ended up at the left tail end.

 

[Viktri]

Yes, some of the comparables being used are not very credible. All Harvard grads are on the Hedge Fund Manager track then? Or have the expectation of earnings that mirror it?

This isn't to belittle Moore's injuries, that he has lost the ability to earn a livelihood that would have set him up nicely, even with a shorter or average length NHL career. I think that's where it starts. It's hard to prove statistically that he would have ended up at the left tail end.

Indeed, as someone in the industry of which people are claiming that Moore would have made X amount of money due to his Y degree, I can tell you that it is entirely untrue that 1) a Harvard degree guarantees or even provides good odds for a lucrative position at his age in the finance industry; 2) that being a banker, portfolio manager or equity research analyst are easily interchangeable positions; and 3) Moore's sports training grants him super networking powers in the sports industry (he was active in hockey, was not prolific, and hockey M&A details aren't super common and normally go to trusted advisers, and Moore cannot support the necessary connection that 4th line => expert analysis of making money through hockey operations).

A hedge fund marketer is likely the highest paying job that Moore would be eligible for (note that he would miss the normal training period that analysts go through due to his hockey career that he claims he will have, with such period being the ages 22 to 30) and he wouldn't have the technical capabilities AND track record that would make him a banker/PM.

I'm not saying that it isn't possible, just saying that it isn't likely - and I believe that the judge calculates the judgment via probability x salary = expected value of salary. As the probability approaches zero, so does the expected value of salary.

 

[Killion]

I don't think there was ever a question that Bertuzzi, Crawford, et al. would be found responsible to some extent, but my understanding it that Canadian laws are quite different, and far more restrictive on the tort side of the equation, namely having limits on awards due to actual projected loss-- and not the unlimited damages/harm awards US juries seem to hand out. That's one reason Moore's camp initially tried to have the case heard in Colorado. The court there, and rightly so, claimed it lacked jurisdiction over an event that happened in Canada. BC laws were far more restrictive, iirc, so Moore filed in Ontario. I was somewhat surprised that the case could be filed in Ontario, and again due to the incident taking place in Vancouver.

Maybe some of our Canadian posters with legal backgrounds can shed some light on that paint.

... and from what I recall, that Moore had Thornhill (suburb in Toronto) listed as his primary residence, not Denver. Wasnt a full time resident of the state. Additionally, he filed in Ontario rather than BC because he didnt feel he'd get a fair trial in BC vs the Canucks, Bertuzzi, Crawford, Burke & McCaw. So they filed in Ontario claiming Steve Moores parents, who'd been watching the game on TV and were traumatized by the event and who therefore had every right to file did so seeking $1.5M in damages attached to which was a $15M+ claim from Steve Moore as well. A lot of back & forth obviously & 10yrs later, but thats my recollection of the way it played out. Ive read opinions by Lawyers who dismiss such, that how can you file suit in Ontario for something that you see on TV or the internet that happens in another province or even country possibly be heard in Ontario? Well, apparently the Ontario Supreme Court in this case was willing to do so.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

The average salary in Canada is under $50k a year before taxes. Spltting his $6MM into 40 more working years would net $150k a year after taxes which is equivalent to around $230K before taxes . That would put him well inyo the top quintile of average family income. That's not middle class.

The average starting salary for a Harvard grad is $60k a year for comparisons sake. No idea what Moore's grades were like so I guess that's a best estimate.

There is the idea though that Steve Moore is going to require quite a bit of care at some point. We don't know that, but would it be surprising at all if that came at say the age of 50 because of his brain damage? I am not surprised that is what he comes away with at the end of the day and really given the situation without NHL and Canucks money he probably would end up with substantially less. It isn't like Bertuzzi hasn't had the means and probably the legal council to put most of his money in overseas bank accounts in the event this verdict was more substantial on his end than it ended up becoming.

It is about time to turn the page on this incident though, I hope all parties can move on and we are not reading a hardship story on Moore in a decade though I don't expect this is the last of this given his injuries and us knowing a lot more about what that could potentially lead to and at a younger age because of this. But it will be nice to have this out of the NHL news cycle for a little while.

 

[Fugu]

There is the idea though that Steve Moore is going to require quite a bit of care at some point. We don't know that, but would it be surprising at all if that came at say the age of 50 because of his brain damage? I am not surprised that is what he comes away with at the end of the day and really given the situation without NHL and Canucks money he probably would end up with substantially less. It isn't like Bertuzzi hasn't had the means and probably the legal council to put most of his money in overseas bank accounts in the event this verdict was more substantial on his end than it ended up becoming.

It is about time to turn the page on this incident though, I hope all parties can move on and we are not reading a hardship story on Moore in a decade though I don't expect this is the last of this given his injuries and us knowing a lot more about what that could potentially lead to and at a younger age because of this. But it will be nice to have this out of the NHL news cycle for a little while.

Due to the limits on damages in Canada being substantially different to those in the US, the best that Moore's team could hope for IS a settlement so that the NHL et al avoid the publicity of a trial. I remain convinced that an award through their court system would not be nearly as substantial as what the teams and league would pay to avoid a trial due to publicity. This isn't the US where a jury could award whatever amount they felt was appropriate, limitless in a legal sense.

 

[Fugu]

... and from what I recall, that Moore had Thornhill (suburb in Toronto) listed as his primary residence, not Denver. Wasnt a full time resident of the state. Additionally, he filed in Ontario rather than BC because he didnt feel he'd get a fair trial in BC vs the Canucks, Bertuzzi, Crawford, Burke & McCaw. So they filed in Ontario claiming Steve Moores parents, who'd been watching the game on TV and were traumatized by the event and who therefore had every right to file did so seeking $1.5M in damages attached to which was a $15M+ claim from Steve Moore as well. A lot of back & forth obviously & 10yrs later, but thats my recollection of the way it played out. Ive read opinions by Lawyers who dismiss such, that how can you file suit in Ontario for something that you see on TV or the internet that happens in another province or even country possibly be heard in Ontario? Well, apparently the Ontario Supreme Court in this case was willing to do so.

Yes, I remember his legal team going through all sorts of machinations to find a way to file in Ontario, where the laws were a bit more flexible than BC's. Hopefully someone with the legal expertise can clear that up for us.

 

[UsernameWasTaken]

Yes, I remember his legal team going through all sorts of machinations to find a way to file in Ontario, where the laws were a bit more flexible than BC's. Hopefully someone with the legal expertise can clear that up for us.

I don't know the specifics about BC off the top of my head, but in Ontario, the "Family Law Act" allows family members of the injured party to recover damages for financial losses re the care, guidance, and companionship they suffered b/c of the injured parties injuries.

edit - this link might be helpful re Ontario (scroll down to section F) http://www.siskinds.com/Publications/All/Understanding-Damages-Assessed-In-Personal-Injury.aspx

I think in BC the injured party actually has to have died. But idk for sure.

50% to lawyers would be exceptionally high. Most contingency fee agreements are more in the range of 30%.

Also, under Canadian law, I don't think you pay income tax on a settlement as it is not employment income, but I could stand to be corrected on that.

It depends on the type of settlement (or court judgment) you're getting the $$ from. If it's from a personal injury case then typically no (unless, of course, you take the $ you receive and invest it and then start earning income of the investments - that's taxable). Damages from other sorts of claims (breach of contract, wrongful dismissal, etc) are typically taxable.

I believe it depends upon how the settlement is structured. My understanding is the lost wage component may be taxable, while the damage component is not. Likely will need to have some type of judgment on accepting the breakdowns from the CRA in this case.

Specific and general damages usually aren't taxable even if they're attributable to loss of income (past and future). You get into a tricky situation re whether the money you're getting is actually damages or whether it's meant as employment income (but the latter is more of an issue if you're actually getting $ from a disability claim rather than as a damage award).

 

[seanlinden]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Canadian courts don't neccessarily have a limit on "actual" damages. If Moore can convince a judge that he would've earned $68m more than he actually did, as a result of Bertuzzi's criminal act, then he would've gotten it.

The difference between Canada and the US, is in the punitive, or "pain and suffering" damages; which tend to be much higher.

 

[Yukon Joe]

I don't think there was ever a question that Bertuzzi, Crawford, et al. would be found responsible to some extent, but my understanding it that Canadian laws are quite different, and far more restrictive on the tort side of the equation, namely having limits on awards due to actual projected loss-- and not the unlimited damages/harm awards US juries seem to hand out. That's one reason Moore's camp initially tried to have the case heard in Colorado. The court there, and rightly so, claimed it lacked jurisdiction over an event that happened in Canada. BC laws were far more restrictive, iirc, so Moore filed in Ontario. I was somewhat surprised that the case could be filed in Ontario, and again due to the incident taking place in Vancouver.

Maybe some of our Canadian posters with legal backgrounds can shed some light on that paint.

Thus, Moore's side has to, realistically, show as much evidence as possible that Moore could have earned X amount, by whatever means, making that the crux of the award or settlement.

Filing in Ontario versus BC leaves me stumped as a lawyer, quite honestly. However in my experience once you file a matter in a specific court, the judges of that court are often loathe to send the file away, instead feeling that they are the best court to hear the matter.

In Canada, there is a cap for "pain and suffering" damages. Originally it was $100,000, now increased by inflation to somewhere in the range of $300-$400k. The legal term for these kinds of losses are "non-pecuniary damages", that is damages that can not be quantified.

There is, however, no limit to pecuniary damages - that is damages that can be quantified. And plaintiff's lawyers are very good at coming up with ways of quantifying those damages. Loss of income is an obvious one. It can be difficult to come up with a number (typically you hire an economist to act as an expert witness), but difficult doesn't mean impossible. Costs of future care is another big one.

In the gallows humour you often see in the legal profession, it's often been noted that if you are going to run someone over with your car, you'd better hope you kill them - the judgment amount for a dead person will be less expensive than the cost of care for decades to come.

 

[Killion]

Filing in Ontario versus BC leaves me stumped as a lawyer, quite honestly. However in my experience once you file a matter in a specific court, the judges of that court are often loathe to send the file away, instead feeling that they are the best court to hear the matter.

Yes its unusual, and though Im no Lawyer my assumption and based on what Ive read about it, even though Moores primary residence was/is Ontario, the incident having occurred in BC, that the latter would be the appropriate venue. Bertuzzi's (et al) Lawyers having a very strong argument that BC & not Ontario would be the proper forum. Moores parents, their Lawyer invoking a Family Law precept most often used in Divorce proceedings. At issue that with common law, watching a tort occur on TV (or the internet) 1000's of miles away & out province apparently consistently dismissed by Ontario's Courts as not being cause for action in that province. Yet file they did seeking $1.5M attached to which was Steve Moores claim seeking $15M+ in damages. That Ontario was the appropriate forum as he'd not receive a fair hearing in BC & so on. Rather interesting & unique approach, tactic.

 

[UsernameWasTaken]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Canadian courts don't neccessarily have a limit on "actual" damages. If Moore can convince a judge that he would've earned $68m more than he actually did, as a result of Bertuzzi's criminal act, then he would've gotten it.

The difference between Canada and the US, is in the punitive, or "pain and suffering" damages; which tend to be much higher.

Pretty much. There's no cap on compensatory damages.

Punitive and pain and suffering damages aren't the same thing. Pain and suffering damages are 'non pecuniary' damages. They're intended to compensate the victim for non-monetary losses. Currently the upper limit in Canada is about $360k. Punitive damages is a damage award that is intended to 'punish' a defendant who has behaved particularly egregiously. They are rare in Canada relative to the US. The upper limit is about $1 mill. So, yes...in those two categories awards in the US can be way higher than Canada.

 

[Brooklanders*]

At least good will come about. That will be positive for all involved. Hopefully the NHL highlights these events so that actions like Bertuzzis shall not be seen again. I am hoping for a long and nasty trial that results in a huge payment with negative attention directed toward the NHL, Bertuzzi, and the unions.