The Unknown Poster Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/12557420/nhl-motion-dismiss-concussion-suit-denied-judge A judge in U.S. District Court in Minnesota denied the NHL's motion for dismissal in the current concussion litigation facing the league. The suit was brought on behalf of several former NHL players. It alleged the NHL to be responsible for the "pathological and debilitating effects of brain injuries" caused by concussions that the former players suffered in their careers. The NHL attempted to get the case thrown out by arguing both time-sensitivity and jurisdictional issues. The league also claimed the suit was not "adequately pled." U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson found the league's three arguments for dismissal insufficient. "The Court finds each of these arguments insufficient to warrant dismissal because: (1) it is not clear from the face of the Master Complaint that Plaintiffs' claims are untimely; (2) Plaintiffs' claims are adequately pled; and (3) it is not possible on the present record to determine which jurisdictions' laws apply to Plaintiffs' medical monitoring claim," Nelson wrote, according to court documents obtained by ESPN.com. Nelson has yet to issue a ruling on the league's other motion for dismissal, which is based on labor law pre-emption. No timeline has been divulged to either party as to when that ruling will be made, sources confirmed to ESPN.com. Wednesday's ruling was just the latest in what is expected to be a bitter legal battle. The six plaintiffs in the case -- Dan LaCouture, Michael Peluso, Gary Leeman, Bernie Nicholls, David Christian and Reed Larson -- claim that the NHL spurned their duty to advise players of the risks they faced with concussions and brain injuries and both "intentionally concealed material information" from and "recklessly endangered" the plaintiffs. "We are pleased the Court has confirmed the validity of our claims and found the NHL's arguments insufficient to warrant dismissal of this case," the plaintiffs' co-lead counsel said in a statement Wednesday. "It is time for the NHL to be held accountable for deliberately ignoring and concealing the risks of repeated head impacts, and finally provide security and care to retired players whom the League has depended on for its success." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted March 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 This could be big. I tend to dislike the lawsuit's general theme, that the NHL is responsible for concussions. Players chose the profession and knew the risk. However, if I recall, the reason the NFL settled was because there existed evidence that the league knew about the risks, knew about CTE and deliberately hid that information from the players. If the NHL players can prove the NHL knew this before it was common knowledge, they will have a case. But really, you can't eliminate risk. Playing in the NHL, you will get physical, you will suffer concussions (maybe some you dont even know about). CTE will be a growing concern. But we arent going to eliminate sport. We arent going to eliminate play. But we should be trying to create new ways to diminish the chances of suffering brain injuries. I agree with Gary Lawless that the NHL can never pretend to care about concussions while it winks about fighting. I believe Bettman recently downplayed the evidence of repeated concussions causing CTE. That's the last thing our league leaders should be doing. I know it's all legal posturing, but goodness, to pretend it isnt an issue is pretty low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goalie Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 How many games did these nobodies play in the NHL? Seriously, I've never heard of any of them, bet most their playing career was spent in the AHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted March 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 How many games did these nobodies play in the NHL? Seriously, I've never heard of any of them, bet most their playing career was spent in the AHL. You never heard of Bernie Nichols? 1127 games. 1209 points. Including 70 goals and 150 points in 88/89. sweep the leg, SPuDS and bigg jay 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bb.king Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 Dave Christian was on the 1980 U.S. Olympic team and played several solid seasons for the Jets 1.0 in the 80's. Went on to play for Washington after that. Played more than 1000 games and scored over 700 points. Assuming the David Christian in the lawsuit is the same Dave Christian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigg jay Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 Gary Leeman was a longtime Leaf from the 80's. He is one of only 3 Leafs to score 50 goals in a season, which is incredible considering how long that franchise has been around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacquie Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 ^ Assuming auto-correct didn't like Leeman. Reed Larson played over 900 games for a number of different teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigg jay Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Yep, even auto-correct thinks he's a nobody! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goalie Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Ya Bernie Nichols I remember now. Ugly kings jersey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnzo Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Leeman was involved in one of the worst trades in hockey history, being the principle asset that Calgary received in exchange for Doug Gilmour. That trade spelled the final death for the great Calgary run of the eighties. Ducky 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPuDS Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Uh, who the f cares if they are "big name" players or not.. Grinders and muckers are the ones who are most often fighting and hitting or getting hit, right? Not that I agree with the lawsuit as you know what your getting into when you step on the ice.. It's not competitive jazz dance but insinuating that because they ain't all "big names" that they would be any less worthy of being in the settlement is a little assinine.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goalie Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 What's asinine is its been 20 years since they played and they all knew the risks. Concussions weren't that big of a deal until very recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted March 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Here is the issue everyone has to keep in mind. And it's sort of a smaller point made in the lawsuit - they are suggesting the NHL KNEW the risks at a time when the players didnt and deliberately withheld that information/medical evidence etc from the players. I believe this was the crux of the NFL Player's lawsuit and why it was settled because there WAS evidence the NFL withheld evidence. If you go back 20 years, its reasonable that both the players and the league had no idea about concussions, how often they can happen, what you should do about it and ofcourse, CTE. The issue will be, when did the NHL become aware of some of these issues and what did they do to protect their players. I feel for these guys though. Playing at a time when millionaires werent routine and decades later they are suffering from the effects of simply playing the game and dont have the financial ability to pay the advanced medical costs to treat their conditions. Players would have taken repeated head shots and told to get back out there. No quiet rooms. No MRI's. No concussion protocol. No million dollar contracts. No million dollar insurance policies. Regardless of legal obligation, i'd like to think the leage AND the PA would want to take care of their alumni. If every member of the PA chipped in a few bucks and the league did too, they could help these guys. Its not as simple as "knowing the risks" because knowing you could hurt is different from knowing you could be essentially fine today but 20 years from now you might be suffering dementia from hockey. Look at the NFL player that just retired rather then risk his future health. That's knowing the risk. These guys didnt know the risk of CTE. They did know the risk of injury and my only caveat is that if the league and players were both as in the dark, then so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweep the leg Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 What's asinine is its been 20 years since they played and they all knew the risks. Concussions weren't that big of a deal until very recently. Have you considered that concussions weren't a big deal 20 years ago b/c they didn't know the risks? johnzo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweep the leg Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 I feel for these guys though. Playing at a time when millionaires werent routine and decades later they are suffering from the effects of simply playing the game and dont have the financial ability to pay the advanced medical costs to treat their conditions. Players would have taken repeated head shots and told to get back out there. No quiet rooms. No MRI's. No concussion protocol. No million dollar contracts. No million dollar insurance policies. Remember how funny that Ric Nattress video was when Messier elbowed him in the face and he wobbled back to the bench? Old highlight videos would show that with clown music playing in the background and the announcer laughing about it. How times have changed... SPuDS 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigg jay Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Times have definitely changed in regards to player safety. 20 years ago you still had a couple guys playing with no helmets (MacTavish was the last guy to go without a lid in 1996-97). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ducky Posted March 28, 2015 Report Share Posted March 28, 2015 Im not saying players shouldn't wear helmets but there was (in general) a lot more respect between players and the sticks weren't as high as what they have been in the last 15 or so years. There weren't as many headshots either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goalie Posted March 28, 2015 Report Share Posted March 28, 2015 Tell that to the broadstreet bullies. They would hack whack whatever a guy anywhere they could. Hockey was like a blood sport back in those days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ducky Posted March 28, 2015 Report Share Posted March 28, 2015 I said in general...you are talking about a 2-3 year period of hockey. How is it you remember the Flyers but can't remember Nicholls, Leeman, Christian or Larson? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now