VANCOUVER, British Columbia -- The Vancouver Canucks must pay former hockey player Mike Robitaille the $347,840 in damages awarded him in 1979 for injuries he received after being asked to play with an injured back, the B.C. Court of Appeal ruled Friday.
In a unanimous decision, the appeal court also ordered the Vancouver Hockey Club Ltd. to pay 100 percent, and not 80 percent as the B.C. Supreme Court had ruled, of $35,000 in exemplary damages awarded the 32-year-old former defenseman, who now lives in Buffalo.
In dismissing the club's appeal, Nemetz and two other appeal court judges upehld the trial court's finding that the club was 'in breach of its duty to exercise reasonable care' to ensure the player's safety.
In the original judgement, the court awarded Robitaille $435,000, including $35,000 in exemplary damages, but held the player 20 percent responsible for his own injuries.
Friday's decision increased Robitaille's award by $7,000 to $355,000. The full amount had been paid into court pending the appeal verdict. The Canucks had yet to decide whether they would continue the appeal procedure.
The former hockey player was pleased with the decision but was most anxious to collect his money.
'I'm two months behind on mortgage payments right now (and) we had about 10 extra dollars to spare on my little girl's birthday just a while back and three credit cards to the limit,' he said.
'I was supposed to go out and celebrate tonight ... and I really don't know how I'm going to go out to celebrate because I don't have any money. I'm broke.'
In his Dec. 19, 1979 decision, B.C. Supreme Court Judge W.A. Esson held that Robitaille's injuries were caused by the club's negligence.
Evidence presented at the trial indicated that the defenseman, although injured Jan. 12, 1977, played a week later and suffered a spinal injury that finished his hockey career.
The judge held that the club breached its duty to exercise reasonable care to ensure Robitaille's safety, fitness and health.
'The conduct of the club was such as to merit condemnation and, in addition, cause damage to the plaintiff,' the appeal court judges said in their written decision.