Globe and Mail: Bertuzzi Lawsuit Against Marc Crawford Reinstated

The Globe and Mail is having quite the Dallas Stars-centric week. First the news that the Dallas Stars ownership pursuit is down to two groups, now Marc Crawford re-enters the fray in the seemingly never ending case of Bertuzzi vs Steve Moore. Bertuzzi's law suit against Crawford had been dropped due to a paperwork error, but has now been re-instated, the Globe and Mail says.

That famous incident happened on March 8th, 2004. Two Presidential elections and 7 Stanley Cup winners later, coach Crawford is still dealing with a law suit filed by Bertuzzi in response to a law suit filed against him by Moore. Bertuzzi claimed Crawford should have to pay any moneys awarded to Moore because he encouraged the buffoon forward to go after him.

Lawyers for Todd Bertuzzi managed to recover from a gaffe that saw his third-party lawsuit against his former coach, Marc Crawford, dismissed because they failed to file the paperwork to send it to trial.

Ontario Superior Court of Justice case management master Ronald Dash granted a motion Tuesday morning from Robert Ben, one of Bertuzzi’s lawyers, which reinstated the lawsuit. He also granted Bertuzzi’s lawyers’ request, over the objection of Crawford’s lawyer, to conduct an examination of discovery on Crawford. But Dash limited the examination to four hours and ruled it must be conducted within the next 30 days.

After a season of begging Crawford to light a fire under his players and take more of a hard line stance in his post game remark, Stars fans might find it hard to believe this same docile guy could have possibly been involved with any of that.

Crawford's lawyer isn't happy about Bertuzzi's lawyers resuming requests to examine the Dallas coach:

Jessica Kimmel, Crawford’s lawyer, did not object to reinstating the lawsuit because there was practically no chance the court would let the dismissal stand. But she did object to Bertuzzi’s lawyers asking for the right to examine Crawford after saying several times during conferences and hearings going back to 2006 that it probably wouldn’t be necessary. She also said the request for examination was not mentioned in the motion to reinstate the lawsuit and the lawyers were told in February, 2009 that they needed to make a decision on examining Crawford. [Globe and Mail]

Moore vs Bertuzzi and Bertuzzi vs Crawford are both expected to go to court early next year, just 7 years after the fact.

X
Log In Sign Up

forgot?
Log In Sign Up

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

Join Defending Big D

You must be a member of Defending Big D to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Defending Big D. You should read them.

Join Defending Big D

You must be a member of Defending Big D to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Defending Big D. You should read them.

Spinner

Authenticating

Great!

Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.

tracking_pixel_9355_tracker