Arland Bruce sues CFL over concussions

The Place for BC Lion Discussion. A forum for Lions fans to talk and chat about our team.
Discussion, News, Information and Speculation regarding the BC Lions and the CFL.
Prowl, Growl and Roar!

Moderator: Team Captains

User avatar
Ravi
Legend
Posts: 1051
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 9:01 pm
Location: St Catharines, Ontario

This stems from his time with the Lions: http://theconcussionblog.com/2014/07/16 ... #more-7856
User avatar
Rammer
Team Captain
Posts: 22320
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 6:04 pm
Location: Coquitlam, B.C.

Ravi wrote:This stems from his time with the Lions: http://theconcussionblog.com/2014/07/16 ... #more-7856
Well I guess his CFL days are officially over. He was healthy coming into BC and did miss those games due to the head injury. I am sure that he has a case, but as the article suggests, there will be many more coming forward now with a lead to follow....ahem Matt Dunigan.
Entertainment value = an all time low
User avatar
DanoT
Hall of Famer
Posts: 4309
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Victoria, B.C. in summer, Sun Peaks Resort in winter

The Lions did not rush Bruce back to active play after only one or two games, so they have that in their favour but I guess a lot will hinge on whether he was pressured to return to play while still exhibiting some concussion like symptoms. This may be difficult to prove unless Bruce documented things at the time. Then again for all we know Bruce may have pressured the Lions to return to play and he is suing them because they failed to stop him.
User avatar
pennw
Legend
Posts: 1921
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:50 am
Location: Chilliwack

Was this not the time when both Bruce and Simon were out at the same time ? And during that time Nick Moore and Courtney Taylor took their spots ,the two replacements playing better than either starter . It did not seem to be any pressure for Bruce to return because of Moore's and Taylor's performances , in fact many wanted to keep Bruce and Simon sidelined . I can't see how it was not his own push to get his starting spot back , as it was being taken away from him .Then when he was let go ,he signed on with Montreal of his own free will , did he not ?
I get it that players need to be protected when their faculties are skewed by a concussion , but there has to be some assumption of risk on the players part too . If he had an issue with the hit in BC , why did he go on playing for Montreal up until they cut him ?
User avatar
Toppy Vann
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9789
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 12:56 pm

As a first case related to head injuries/concussions I'm not convinced given how this played out that year in BC that the case would be a slam dunk win - unless the plaintiff can prove the key elements in the statement of claim to the satisfaction of judge sitting alone or a judge and 8 jurors (6 must concur after at least 3 hours IIRC) in BC Supreme Court. Of course it is decided in civil on the balance of probability unlike criminal which has to be beyond reasonable doubt to convict. He'd certainly have to prove the alleged reporting of the symptoms versus it ending up - 'he says', 'they deny'. Then there has to be the medical evidence.

There would certainly be interest in the legal community taking the case on as if they won their first case, the idea would be that others would follow. That means the plaintiff would need to proceed on a contingent fee basis where the lawyer would get pay of the proceeds of a judgment or lose it all and if they did they could likely be subject to some of the costs of the defendants. Contingency fees in BC are up to 33 and 1/3 of the judgment (again from recollection) however many lawyers in more straight forward personal injury cases will work for less (maybe 25%).

BC jury trials require the party that asks for a jury to fund the jury expenses and this is another fee in a complex trial. A 10 day trial is in excess of 10,000 as I recall.

It used to be that motor vehicle crashes were mostly jury trials as ICBC used to elect for a jury if they felt that there were credibility issues with the plaintiff. One Supreme Court justice who was later on the Court of Appeal felt that then Justice Vickers was right - BC drivers who pay ICBC premiums should not be on jury trials as it was their policyholder funds paying claims. They felt that a judge would be fairer even if they were lying and give them something whereas the juries would not buy the story and award nothing. Other civil trials often just have the judge as then they don't risk more than the legal fees especially if they lose.
"Ability without character will lose." - Marv Levy
TheLionKing
Hall of Famer
Posts: 25103
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 10:13 pm
Location: Vancouver

I agree Toppy. It's going to be a difficult case to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. In pro sports, a player often plays through his injuries without advising the medical staff.
User avatar
Big Time
Champion
Posts: 972
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2003 6:45 pm

Arland is just fishing for a quick settlement because no one else wants to hire him. He was trying out for another team as recently as two weeks ago. His case is highly unlikely to even get a settlement because he has zero credibility due to his past behaviours, he played an entire season with Montreal after BC, and he went on record as saying he felt ready to comeback after four weeks but the Lions purposely held him out for eight weeks. If he failed to properly disclose symptoms because he wanted to play, that's on him. No way the league offers him a dime as settlment because if a case as weak as this gets settled, it will open the floodgates to much more serious lawsuits. Arland's lack of personal credibility is going to kill this lawsuit before it even gets off the ground.
User avatar
Hambone
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8173
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 10:25 pm
Location: Living in PG when not at BC Place, Grey Cup or Mazatlan.

The lawyer was on earlier today in 1040. I'm listening to Primetime on Fan590 right now. McCown will have her on sometime this hour.
You're as old as you've ever been and as young as you're ever going to be.
User avatar
WestCoastJoe
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17721
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm

Head shots have to go. Leading with the head. Head to chest. Head to head. As Chris Jones pointed out, head to the side works. Willis actually did have his head to the side, but his helmet slid up a bit. Too bad. Penalty.

Law suits? They are a comin' ...

Times change. On this site a few years back I posted something about a college coach back in the 60s or 70s who would line up his linebackers, about 5 yards apart, and have them charge each other like rams. Head to head. We find that ridiculous now, but not so much then. It is somewhat horrifying to think of the damage done in that drill.
John Madden's Team Policies: Be on time. Pay attention. Play like hell on game day.

Jimmy Johnson's Game Keys: Protect the ball. Make plays.

Walter Payton's Advice to Kids: Play hard. Play fair. Have fun.
User avatar
Toppy Vann
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9789
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 12:56 pm

WestCoastJoe wrote:Head shots have to go. Leading with the head. Head to chest. Head to head. As Chris Jones pointed out, head to the side works. Willis actually did have his head to the side, but his helmet slid up a bit. Too bad. Penalty.

Law suits? They are a comin' ...

Times change. On this site a few years back I posted something about a college coach back in the 60s or 70s who would line up his linebackers, about 5 yards apart, and have them charge each other like rams. Head to head. We find that ridiculous now, but not so much then. It is somewhat horrifying to think of the damage done in that drill.
We practiced tackling and ball carrying as kids and I - being small but quick - would lower my head and spin off the helmet of an opponent and it worked like a hot dam. We didn't deliberately ram helmets. I am horrified to think of how this was done but for head and neck injuries BUT we really didn't know this stuff.

WCJ - civil trials are not beyond reasonable doubt - just criminal but decided in BC on the balance of probabilities - a lower standard of proof. However there would be 'he said' and 'no we did not say' short of evidence as to what the victim told his employers and of course what his employers told him. OJ for instance in the USA - slight differences was found not guilty as the jury had reasonable doubt (Calif law test) but the civil trial found him responsible. They didn't have to actually prove it - but it was very likely it was him and they got him there. Ruined him financially.

Arland is not seeking a quick settlement as this would be the FIRST test case should it come to trial. In fact it might not be the first if the a bunch of players decided to do this and got a bunch of top Trial Lawyers onside.

There would not be an out of court settlement in this type of case as it it'd likely not be seen in the interests of the team and the CFL.


If they were to get top trial lawyers onside to take up the cause of former players they'd together decide the strategy and tactics and decide which cases have the best chance of success both at trial and on appeal (if there were grounds based on what they'd be arguing) and then they 'd proceed. I see his lawyer is a member of the Trials Lawyers Association and a frequent speaker. BC has top trial lawyers in personal injury practice and you bet they'd be quick to grab a new series of cases like this if they felt they were people out there victimized and there were deep pockets to pay a judgment. How deep the CFL teams' pockets pales compared to the NHL and the NFL though so that might dampen the enthusiasm for a ton of cases.

If I wanted a good case (I'm not a lawyer) my sense is that one of the best would be Buck Pierce where you could see teams head hunting (Argos blitzing in game one preseason!) Argos player and others referring to the 'soft melon' or injury proneness. CFL refs letting him take BIG hts with no calls. BUT I doubt Buck would do that and it'd be hard to be in the CFL while suing. Again is there any money there?

What I can't recall from my personal injury days is how long a victim has to file a Writ and start the process. IIRC correctly in personal injury cases like ICBC the victim has two years to issue the Writ but the time then to the actual trial stage is not on the clock. Many writs get issued but most never reach court as with a car crash if there are actual visible injuries the extent of damage and their repercussions are all fights to get to the right settlement amount.

I'm not aware of his lawyer which means nothing of course - but Robyn Wishart I see she does a lot work in personal injury in complex cases including brain and spinal cord cases. She was likely just not around in my day but her bio and speaking engagements suggests she knows this area of the law, precedents/relevant case and how to present a case like this at trial. A bio is not the same as the performance but a quick look suggests he has not picked a lawyer who is just doing routine legal work on contracts and mortgages.
"Ability without character will lose." - Marv Levy
User avatar
Rammer
Team Captain
Posts: 22320
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 6:04 pm
Location: Coquitlam, B.C.

Big Time wrote:Arland is just fishing for a quick settlement because no one else wants to hire him. He was trying out for another team as recently as two weeks ago. His case is highly unlikely to even get a settlement because he has zero credibility due to his past behaviours, he played an entire season with Montreal after BC, and he went on record as saying he felt ready to comeback after four weeks but the Lions purposely held him out for eight weeks. If he failed to properly disclose symptoms because he wanted to play, that's on him. No way the league offers him a dime as settlment because if a case as weak as this gets settled, it will open the floodgates to much more serious lawsuits. Arland's lack of personal credibility is going to kill this lawsuit before it even gets off the ground.
If he was trying to land a CFL gig two weeks ago, he sure got on the head injury pretty quick. As you suggest, that weakens his case unless a team tested him and denied him a contract based on his head injuries. As you suggest there are many ready to join the queue if Bruce is successful, in fact his case may hurt the opportunity for others to make a legitimate case.
Entertainment value = an all time low
User avatar
notahomer
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6258
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 12:09 pm
Location: Vancouver

Maybe Bruces alter-ego R. Reth will try to file the suit :wink:

I know what its like to have a concussion. I guess I'd admire someone for wanting to go 'back in the game' but I'd have trouble challenging others into not doing a better job of protecting me against what I was trying to do. There is no question the Lions (and all pro football teams) have short term interest where if the person CAN play, they should. However, in reality, it is in NOBODIES benefit (long term), especially the players, to go back before the player is recovered......
User avatar
DanoT
Hall of Famer
Posts: 4309
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Victoria, B.C. in summer, Sun Peaks Resort in winter

As part of the TSN Panel for tonight's game Dave Naylor said that he went back and looked at the game tape from 2012 when Arland got concussed. Naylor said that the TSN sideline reporter reported that Arland tried to go back into the game and the Lions wouldn't let him. They also kept him on the IR for 49 days.

It would appear that the Lions did a pretty decent job of protecting the health of their player post injury.
User avatar
Hambone
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8173
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 10:25 pm
Location: Living in PG when not at BC Place, Grey Cup or Mazatlan.

It seems like a strange play. After hearing the lawyer twice today I can't really figure out what the suit is about. They aren't targeting the Lions. They aren't accusing them of any sort of negligence. They aren't seeking damages to speak of. It's like they're going after the general process of diagnosing and managing the threat of concussions in the sport and CFL.
You're as old as you've ever been and as young as you're ever going to be.
User avatar
DanoT
Hall of Famer
Posts: 4309
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Victoria, B.C. in summer, Sun Peaks Resort in winter

Does anyone else think that Arland Bruce III may have nixed his chance of getting into the CFL Hall of Fame by suing the CFL?

I'm sure Bruce and others would say the concussion issue is more important than the HOF, but I would say that Bruce is the wrong guy to be the flag bearer for this issue. I don't think that he has thought things thru and in typical AB style he continues to say and do things that are not well thought out.

His most recent misstep is the fact that the law suit was in the works but not made public while he was still trying to play for a CFL team and when he couldn't find work, then makes the law suit public. Very bad optics, bordering on the unethical.

His recent homophobic comments about a openly gay NFL player, while they have no bearing on the law suit, they do provide some insight into typical poor judgement of a guy who at best could be described as quirky or a little harsher description is that he is a flake. There are of course other past instances of Bruce putting his foot in his mouth so Bruce is not what would be described as a reliable witness imo.
Post Reply