[Report] NHL withheld Steve Moore's disability payment unless Bertuzzi lawsuit dropped

[Heretic]

I have a different view on the Cooke hit. At the time, what Matt Cooke did was within the rules. Remember that he was not suspended. Because it was within the rules, I don't think Savard could successfully sue Matt Cooke. On the other hand, he could probably sue his employer(The NHL) for not provided adequate protection.

You always have a choice. This reminds of a the story of the guy in Whistler who killed those 56 sled dogs. It is a different scenario with the same underlying principles. The point is, just because somebody tells you to do something wrong doesn't mean you have to go out and do it.

Crawford and Bertuzzi are accountable. You cannot blame the victim for being on the ice and getting attacked.

We could start a whole new thread on the topic of the violence in general in hockey. But to your point, consenting fights in the NHL are within the rules, punching in the back of the head is not.

$350,000 is not even close to what he deserves, and $38 million may be too much. If that happened to me, I would shoot for the stars as well. Don't pretend like you wouldn't either.

What about punching someone after the whistle has gone to their face when they weren't willing to fight?

Should the Sedins sue half the Bruins who did that to them during the 2011 SCF?

Or are you saying it's okay unless the other person is severely injured?

[R3aL]

I have a different view on the Cooke hit. At the time, what Matt Cooke did was within the rules. Remember that he was not suspended. Because it was within the rules, I don't think Savard could successfully sue Matt Cooke. On the other hand, he could probably sue his employer(The NHL) for not provided adequate protection.

A hit to the back of the head where within the rules? Hitting players multiple seconds after the puck has left there stick was within NHL rules? I don't think it was ever within the rules.. it was a bull technicality and they didnt want to suspend cooke a repeat offender just because they didnt suspend mike richards hit to booths head. It was a political travesty, they were talking all year about head hits, prime example comes up from a dirty player and nothing is done by the league, so by ur logic it was open season, if bertuzzi instead charged at moore from behind and shouldered or elbowed him in the back of the head that would ave beeeen A ok,,,,

You always have a choice. This reminds of a the story of the guy in Whistler who killed those 56 sled dogs. It is a different scenario with the same underlying principles. The point is, just because somebody tells you to do something wrong doesn't mean you have to go out and do it.

Yea of course he had a choice, but have u heard of mob mentality? Imagine the situation he is in every single voice around him is telling him to do something force it all game along with the other tough guys on the team. And in the army if a superior tells u to do something even if its wrong u usually do it. He was following his coaches demands too. I am not saying it was right but I am saying there were more factors involved.

Crawford and Bertuzzi are accountable. You cannot blame the victim for being on the ice and getting attacked.

Oh 100% they are accountable, but so should the refs who didnt do anything to stop it, even though it was expected form the beg of the game, got worse as the game went along, and after it was a blowout they should have been doing their job and paying attention to it and stopping it before it happened, there is a level of accountability their, same with Col coach trying to bait the canccks to take a penalty, what was the pint of playing him when it was 5-0?

We could start a whole new thread on the topic of the violence in general in hockey. But to your point, consenting fights in the NHL are within the rules, punching in the back of the head is not.

Look at Brooks Orpik, why isnt he sueing Thornton, action was = to bertuzzi if not worse but the level of damage was worse. So was the problem level of injury or the action in general because thats a big deal, the action of a sucker punch in the NHL are filled with examples just youtube or google it, the problem was level of injury, and the team pile up def made that worse, and it was unlucky how he fell to the ice.

$350,000 is not even close to what he deserves, and $38 million may be too much. If that happened to me, I would shoot for the stars as well. Don't pretend like you wouldn't either.

It was not just 350000, it was 350000 when he offered it which is worht more than 350000 is today, it was almost a full year of Moores salary, and for all we know in a year moore could have been an AHL player earning 80k a year for 3-4 more years and then retiring. He wasnt a star player, he was a dirty grinder who would have had a plateful of suspensions in todays NHL.

And he would have also received disability pay, and perhaps started his own business or something and used that as the initial capital to do so. He could have been making steady cashflows since he recovered plus have collected hundreds of thousands in disibility pay and the 250k from bert, and who knows maybe if he sued for only 6 mill and was awarded 3 mill he would have been a millions times better off. He could have accepted berts apology, and moved on.

Dont u say I would be anything like moore in the same position, he is a lazy loser, and I would def not sit on my ass for years just trying to cheat the system into getting rich, he would never have made 10 million let alone 38 million in his career.

[R3aL]

What about punching someone after the whistle has gone to their face when they weren't willing to fight?

Should the Sedins sue half the Bruins who did that to them during the 2011 SCF?

Or are you saying it's okay unless the other person is severely injured?

Yea exactly this too.

[R3aL]

...and McSorely did a two handed stick chop to Brashear's temple, and Scott Stevens delivered head shots with his shoulder, and Keith elbowed Sedin to the head, and so on and so on...

Lol this too!

[Vansicle]

So if tomorrow you get hit by a drunk driver (not wishing this to anyone, lets be clear) or any other similar incident and you're paralysed or can't work anymore, you're not going to sue that person for your futur lost salary?

Maybe Moore is aiming too high with his 38M$, but per your reasonning he's not entitled to anything.

If you get hit by a drunk driver and your job is dodging drunk drivers, maybe. Otherwise, your analogy holds zero water.

[Vansicle]

Fighting in hockey is part of the game because it involves 2 willing participants who 99% of the time square off with each other and have a fair fight. Bertuzzi grabbed a guy from behind and sucker punched him. They are 2 completely different scenerio's.

The sucker punch may or may not have caused the injury. What if Moore agreed to fight and was paralyzed? The fact is, that little chickenshirt should have answered the bell. You play dirty, you eat knuckle sandwiched. And if he didn't wanted to get punched, he should never hit Nazzy. End. Of. Fog King. Story.

[Browntown01]

Now we're getting somewhere. So you are on the side that doesn't want fighting in Hockey?

In any fight, there is always a chance that someone is going to get knocked out.

Whether by luck or just one guy stronger than the other or falling.

Fighting is not part of any coaching manual I ever used - yet it is in the game.

The players know it and assume the risk.

Just like you if you took up sky diving, will assume the risk and can NOT sue the pilot if you are hurt during your dive.

Again, the issue I have is not his right to sue, but the amount.

Again apples and oranges. Fighting is with 2 willing combatants. Bertuzzi chased Moore down the and punched him in the back of the head.

[Browntown01]

What about punching someone after the whistle has gone to their face when they weren't willing to fight?

Should the Sedins sue half the Bruins who did that to them during the 2011 SCF?

Or are you saying it's okay unless the other person is severely injured?

I'm saying Moore has the right to sue Bertuzzi because Bertuzzi ended his career with a premeditated punch to the back of the head

[TimberWolf]

I'm saying Moore has the right to sue Bertuzzi because Bertuzzi ended his career with a premeditated punch to the back of the head

Premeditated? That isn't proven. It looked more heat of the moment. Moore made a rat move and turned away. Bert then hit him.

Shouldn't have happened and an unfortunate result but it's obvious the desire was to get Moore to turn and fight.

[Chalky]

I have to say, I don't weep for Steve Moore. If he was going for a reasonable sum of money I would have more sympathy for his situation. The fact that really bothers me this many years later, is that although Bert caused the incident by knocking him out with a blind sucker punch to the side of the noggin, the he clearly tries to protect him on the way down, and then people piled on top. I truly believe this should have been dealt with years ago and all sides (so many parties involved) have had a hand in prolonging the agony. It should never have gone this far. Moore was on the radio a while back and he sounds like a lawyer trying to sleeze his way into a win than a victim trying for justice. He deserves something, I would never wish this on anyone, but this circus is created partly by Moore.

[Heretic]

Again apples and oranges. Fighting is with 2 willing combatants. Bertuzzi chased Moore down the and punched him in the back of the head.

Technically he hit him in the side of the head - but whose looking for technicalities?

Lindros didn't "expect" to get clocked by Steven's shoulder - he wasn't a willing combatant.

The Sedins didn't expect and were unwilling to receive jabs to their faces after many whistles during the 2011 SCF.

The point is, anyone can be hurt seriously by just playing hockey.

Again, I'm not defending Bertuzzi, what he did was wrong - but not $38 million wrong.

3 years salary tops for Moore based on what he was making in 2004 ($425,000), with maybe a bit of a raise each of those years, say $1.5 million tops.

Ready to settle?

[Chalky]

<p>I'm very surprised by a lot of the statements in this thread and a lack of compassion for a guy who lost his entire career to a thug in Bertuzzi. Just because Bertuzzi was a Canuck when it happened shouldn't mean he's gets a waiver. One statement above concluded it was just part of the game. Wrong! This was not part of the game but rather a deliberate attempt by Bertuzzi to injure another player. I am sure Bertuzzi only wanted to fight but he is responsible for his actions that caused this career ending injury. If you're holding up a store and your gun accidentally goes off and injures the cashier you can't say "I was just trying to rob the place and didn't mean to hurt anyone". The fact is you did. Calling Moore greedy is absurd. The man had a debillitating injury. Everything he worked so hard to achieve in the NHL was taken from him by Bertuzzi. If uniforms were reversed and Moore was the Canuck who got injured you guys would be calling it the other way. Case in point - every time we play you guys now there is always at least a comment or two in the game day thread about Keith's hit on Sedin a few years ago and how revenge must be enacted. Now imagine if Sedin's career ended from the elbow hit? Would you be calling Sedin selfish for suing Keith and the Blackhawks? I doubt it. Bottom line - try to take the fan glasses off when evaluating the Bertuzzi / Moore case - show some compassion. I feel for the guy who got injured and it was a terrible thing to happen. Moore doesn't deserve the criticism he is getting here.</p>

I'm not sure if you are in Chicago or Vancouver, but I've been in Vancouver for 38 years and most people that I know don't give Bert a pass. For years I was on Moore's "side". It's really only in the last few years that this has gone on...and on...and on...and on that I have started to question his motives. I don't think it's necessarily greed, but 38 Mil is ludicrous, make it smaller number and it's dealt with/finito a long time ago. I also don't think it has been the most egregious act in hockey in my life, Mcsorley's chop on Brashear was worse. To answer your question, I would not want Sedin suing Keith if his career was ended, but if that was the case, if Sedin dragged out for over a decade I would start to question him as well. No question Bert caused it and is responsible, but it was certainly compounded by the dog pile, it's not really comparable to Keith's dirty elbow which was during play and a lone act. Perhaps a little more respect in the game is in order.

[Browntown01]

A hit to the back of the head where within the rules? Hitting players multiple seconds after the puck has left there stick was within NHL rules? I don't think it was ever within the rules.. it was a bull technicality and they didnt want to suspend cooke a repeat offender just because they didnt suspend mike richards hit to booths head. It was a political travesty, they were talking all year about head hits, prime example comes up from a dirty player and nothing is done by the league, so by ur logic it was open season, if bertuzzi instead charged at moore from behind and shouldered or elbowed him in the back of the head that would ave beeeen A ok,,,,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but what Cooke did to Savard was, at the time, within the rules of the game. People saw what happened, and were appalled and thus a rule was made to prevent blindside hits. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying what Cooke did was right, my point was that I believe that Savard would be unsuccessful with a civil suit against Cooke. I believe he could file a suit against the NHL for not adequately protecting their players. For all we know, this could have been settled privately.

Yea of course he had a choice, but have u heard of mob mentality? Imagine the situation he is in every single voice around him is telling him to do something force it all game along with the other tough guys on the team. And in the army if a superior tells u to do something even if its wrong u usually do it. He was following his coaches demands too. I am not saying it was right but I am saying there were more factors involved.

It would be tough but mob mentality is not an excuse. You can't excuse people who rioted because everybody was doing it. He challenged him to a fight, and when Moore declined, all Bertuzzi needed to do was skate away. He tried to engage him and Moore wanted nothing to do with it. No need to follow him up the ice and sucker punch him in the back of the head.

Oh 100% they are accountable, but so should the refs who didnt do anything to stop it, even though it was expected form the beg of the game, got worse as the game went along, and after it was a blowout they should have been doing their job and paying attention to it and stopping it before it happened, there is a level of accountability their, same with Col coach trying to bait the canccks to take a penalty, what was the pint of playing him when it was 5-0?

Again you are blaming the victim. Moore was well within his rights to be on the ice, and Tony Granato was within his rights to play him. The blame lies with Crawford for telling Bertuzzi to make him pay, and for Bertuzzi for attacking him.

This is a bit of an extreme analogy but it is similar to blaming a woman for being raped for walking through a dark alley or wearing skimpy clothes. In hindsight, maybe she shouldn't have walked through the alley or wore what she did, but in the end, the blame falls 100% on the attacker.

I understand these are different circumstances, but the point is that you can't blame the victim for being attacked.

Look at Brooks Orpik, why isnt he sueing Thornton, action was = to bertuzzi if not worse but the level of damage was worse. So was the problem level of injury or the action in general because thats a big deal, the action of a sucker punch in the NHL are filled with examples just youtube or google it, the problem was level of injury, and the team pile up def made that worse, and it was unlucky how he fell to the ice.

What Thornton did to Oprik is just as bad as what happened to Moore. Both were premeditated attacks that led to an injury. The difference is that Moore lost his livelihood. Since Orpik was able to pay again, I don't know if he could successfully file a civil suit against Thornton.

It was not just 350000, it was 350000 when he offered it which is worht more than 350000 is today, it was almost a full year of Moores salary, and for all we know in a year moore could have been an AHL player earning 80k a year for 3-4 more years and then retiring. He wasnt a star player, he was a dirty grinder who would have had a plateful of suspensions in todays NHL.

And he would have also received disability pay, and perhaps started his own business or something and used that as the initial capital to do so. He could have been making steady cashflows since he recovered plus have collected hundreds of thousands in disibility pay and the 250k from bert, and who knows maybe if he sued for only 6 mill and was awarded 3 mill he would have been a millions times better off. He could have accepted berts apology, and moved on.

$350,000 in 2004 is only worth $450,879.31 in 2012 dollars if you take inflation in to account.

There is no way to judge Moore's future value. But the fact that he made the NHL, is worth something. In addition to the fact that he has medical requirements and a lower standard of life. Now add on to the fact that he is a Harvard Grad with permanent brain damage, $450,879.31 is not enough. I don't think he deserves $38 million, but $450k is no where close.

Dont u say I would be anything like moore in the same position, he is a lazy loser, and I would def not sit on my ass for years just trying to cheat the system into getting rich, he would never have made 10 million let alone 38 million in his career.

How is he lazy? The fact that he suffers from post concussion symptoms and likely can't work?

[Browntown01]

Technically he hit him in the side of the head - but whose looking for technicalities?

Lindros didn't "expect" to get clocked by Steven's shoulder - he wasn't a willing combatant.

The Sedins didn't expect and were unwilling to receive jabs to their faces after many whistles during the 2011 SCF.

The point is, anyone can be hurt seriously by just playing hockey.

Again, I'm not defending Bertuzzi, what he did was wrong - but not $38 million wrong.

3 years salary tops for Moore based on what he was making in 2004 ($425,000), with maybe a bit of a raise each of those years, say $1.5 million tops.

Ready to settle?

Again, I'm saying what Cooke did was wrong. I was debating the merits of whether or not Savard could successfully sue Cooke.

The difference between what happened with Moore and the other instances you listed, is that what happened to Moore was premeditated. Brad May said after the game that there was a bounty on Moore's head, and Bertuzzi acted on it.

As for the settlement, you have to take more in to account than Moore's salary. Inflation, lower standard of life, medical bills, mental distress. Is all that worth $38 million? Probably not, but they are worth a hell of a lot more than what Bertuzzi offered.

[CookieCrumbs]

Take a bloody hike Moore.

Bring back Bert.

[R3aL]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but what Cooke did to Savard was, at the time, within the rules of the game. People saw what happened, and were appalled and thus a rule was made to prevent blindside hits. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying what Cooke did was right, my point was that I believe that Savard would be unsuccessful with a civil suit against Cooke. I believe he could file a suit against the NHL for not adequately protecting their players. For all we know, this could have been settled privately.

What Thornton did to Oprik is just as bad as what happened to Moore. Both were premeditated attacks that led to an injury. The difference is that Moore lost his livelihood. Since Orpik was able to pay again, I don't know if he could successfully file a civil suit against Thornton.

So if something appalling happened today, like a player a took off his skate threw it at a player and cut a guys throat open, and there wasnt an exact rule to enforce it technicallyyy it would be ok. Because there was no set rule against it? Even though it was clearly an extremely dirty hit, especially since it was career ending. And it ended a pretty awesome career.

If you wanna get into extreme examples like woman being raped, its hard not to take your, at the time it was within the rules example. There are too many examples in human history where rules and justice have been wrong, some more extreme than others.

Since you say the big deal was the dmg done to Moore, and that the act was awful but the real problem was the dmg sustained , it counters several of your views. Your view on Orpik was just because he was because he didnt sustain the same level of injury, but the ACT was worse, The fact is Bertuzzi was absolutley crucified for this and ha paid his price. He missed hockey for awhile sacraficed 400K USD dollars in salary, offered moore 300k almost would have cost him 1 million dollars. IF cooke paid savard I am sure it would be publicized to give savards family and fans closure.

Sure you are technically correct, but with how I see things and my views and values, Bertuzzi was simply crucified for the outcome of what happened. He has already paid much more than other players have for worst transgressions and I dont meen just financially.

It would be tough but mob mentality is not an excuse. You can't excuse people who rioted because everybody was doing it. He challenged him to a fight, and when Moore declined, all Bertuzzi needed to do was skate away. He tried to engage him and Moore wanted nothing to do with it. No need to follow him up the ice and sucker punch him in the back of the head.

Again you are blaming the victim. Moore was well within his rights to be on the ice, and Tony Granato was within his rights to play him. The blame lies with Crawford for telling Bertuzzi to make him pay, and for Bertuzzi for attacking him.

This is a bit of an extreme analogy but it is similar to blaming a woman for being raped for walking through a dark alley or wearing skimpy clothes. In hindsight, maybe she shouldn't have walked through the alley or wore what she did, but in the end, the blame falls 100% on the attacker.

I understand these are different circumstances, but the point is that you can't blame the victim for being attacked.

I never put blame on Moore, two times u have said that, I am saying there is a shared blame, it doesnt all fall on bertuzzi in my pinon the stage was set, orders were given and others stood pat. There were no preventative measures by the refs.

$350,000 in 2004 is only worth $450,879.31 in 2012 dollars if you take inflation in to account.

There is no way to judge Moore's future value. But the fact that he made the NHL, is worth something. In addition to the fact that he has medical requirements and a lower standard of life. Now add on to the fact that he is a Harvard Grad with permanent brain damage, $450,879.31 is not enough. I don't think he deserves $38 million, but $450k is no where close.

I appreciate you busting out ur financial calculator and doing a FV calculation, but your also missing the disability money he could have gotten from the NHL and if he went for a smaller amount of money he could have had a higher settlement, a reasonable one, just to make him go away.

How is he lazy? The fact that he suffers from post concussion symptoms and likely can't work?

In my opinion he is lazy, and wants a free lunch and to cash a lottery ticket on his unfortunate circumstance, I would be willing to bet my whole life on Moore being able to be a functioning contributing citizen who works, runs a business and pays tax just like the rest of us.

He went to harvard chose to become a ice hockey player, a concussion and pityparty later his life became a secret his lawyers top notch for all we know its a complete sham, 60 million was his original lawsuit,,,,, thats INSANE

I appreciate your opinions, arguments, and the discussion but at the end of the day me an u could go back and forth, we are on different ends of this spectrum and I dont see either of our opinions shifting, I have had 8 concussions, if I have 1 more my cognitive abilities could be seriously affected, so I understand PCS and the migraine that can come with them. But I personally do not think if he tried he could not have the ability to work a rewarding career with his harvard designation on his resume, if he really applied himself and worked hard, even if the concussion truly has damaged him as much as he says. Or even through a hook up from school. If it is as bad as he says he should be doing more public interviews showing how bad it is, he should be trying to work and failing at it, he should be. Instead hes hidden behind his high price lawyers where everyone reads off a script and they have hushed him up.

My opinion is based off assumptions, just as yours is, at the end of the day neither of us truly know what exactly is happening with him, I respect your opinions, but I will be withdrawing now just as it could go on and on and on

[viking mama]

So if tomorrow you get hit by a drunk driver (not wishing this to anyone, lets be clear) or any other similar incident and you're paralysed or can't work anymore, you're not going to sue that person for your futur lost salary?

Maybe Moore is aiming too high with his 38M$, but per your reasonning he's not entitled to anything.

What?! Did he actually reduce his claim of suit from the original $60 million he was asking for previously? Wow. Clearly not as greedy as I thought then.

[Industrious1]

Some good discussion with points being made on both sides in this thread, nice to see the art of the debate living on at CDC.

Like many, I believe Moore should be entitled to some compensation for the violence that ended his career...however 38 million is just waaaay over the top.

[drdeath]

The Danson Circus continues:

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=444797

TORONTO -- The former owner of the Vancouver Canucks should be forced to answer, in front of a jury, if he approved a career-ending sucker punch on Steve Moore, a lawyer for the former NHL player argued in court Thursday.

It's now 10 years after Todd Bertuzzi's infamous hit, and Moore's multi-million-dollar lawsuit is finally approaching a trial. Moore's lawyer, Tim Danson, is asking the Ontario Superior Court to compel John McCaw Jr., who is based in Seattle, to testify in Toronto.

"He just goes on with his life with the incredible privileges of being a billionaire...while Steve Moore tries to recover from a shattered life," Danson said in court Thursday.

"For him to say, 'I'm not going to come and testify in any capacity' is regrettable. It's regrettable and it defies principles of fairness and justice. For him to simply hide behind his U.S. citizenship and residency given the nature of all of these facts should not be accepted and it's not something the public would accept."

NHL commissioner Gary Bettman and deputy commissioner Bill Daly have voluntarily agreed to testify, Danson said.

Master Ronald Dash, who is hearing the motion, said he would not order McCaw to testify in person at the trial, slated to begin in September, but is considering Danson's alternate request that McCaw testify via video conference.

McCaw's lawyer, Steven Frankel, argued that the court doesn't have jurisdiction to do that and suggested Danson is trying to do an "end run" around very specific court rules. Frankel said there is no evidence before the court that McCaw, who is not an individual defendant, even has relevant evidence to give.

A jury should be able to hear McCaw answer whether he knew Canucks players were gunning for retaliation against Moore for a hit weeks earlier on former Canucks' captain Markus Naslund that resulted in a concussion, Danson argued.

Bertuzzi has alleged the Canucks' then-coach Marc Crawford urged his players to make Moore "pay the price," while Crawford has claimed Bertuzzi disobeyed instructions to get off the ice before Moore was attacked.

Players were issuing public threats against Moore before the hit, Danson said, and what McCaw did or didn't do about it is "highly relevant to the question of negligence."

"There's no way that you can have the intensity of the public threats over three weeks going on unless the corporate culture set by Mr. McCaw allowed it, and he has to answer to that," Danson said.

Danson suggested that McCaw fostered a corporate culture that may have at least implicitly approved such an attack, including having as the president and general manager Brian Burke, who was "unapologetic about promoting violence in hockey."

"Were Burke and Crawford carrying out the wishes of McCaw?" Danson suggested. "Or given the 'wink'...when it came to getting Mr. Moore?"

McCaw no longer owns the Canucks, having sold his company Orca Bay, now known as Canucks Sports and Entertainment. But he maintains a "very significant financial interest" in the outcome of the lawsuit, as he is still on the hook for half of any liability found against the team, which Danson said was a condition of the sale.

"If he doesn't testify, if he doesn't come forward, our case is going to be significantly weakened," Danson said. "So he knows it's not in his best interest to testify because if he testifies, it will be....to the benefit of the plaintiffs."

Moore is suing Bertuzzi and the Canucks for $38 million for a 2004 on-ice hit that left Moore, then a Colorado Avalanche player, with a concussion and three fractured vertebrae.

Bertuzzi pleaded guilty to a criminal charge of assault causing bodily harm and was sentenced in 2006 to a year's probation and 80 hours of community service.

He also served a multi-game suspension from the NHL but has gone on to play for several other NHL teams, including currently as a forward for the Detroit Red Wings.

Meanwhile, for Moore, it has been a "very, very difficult 10 years," Danson said.

"I think anybody can imagine, your entire life you want to make it in the NHL and he finally makes it...a dream come true and in his rookie year his career is cut short by probably the worst act of criminal violence in sports history," Danson said.

"He still suffers from significant post-concussion symptoms that have a significant impact on his life."

The court is expected to issue a decision in a few weeks.

If this happens Granato must be called to answer why he let Steve Moore bench himself for the rest of the game he hit Naslund in and then why he was playing him so late in the game where Bertuzzi clocked him.

[The Colt 45s]

The Danson Circus continues:

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=444797

If this happens Granato must be called to answer why he let Steve Moore bench himself for the rest of the game he hit Naslund in and then why he was playing him so late in the game where Bertuzzi clocked him.

Moore's lawyer trying to force McCaw to testify is hilarious and desperate. You cannot compel him to testify--like he sanctioned/encouraged a corporate culture of revenge. He also has the financial resources to fight any attempt procedurally. I think this is just a last ditch vain attempt to find someone with a large purse.