B.C.’s Court of Appeal says a woman awarded more than $1 million after she was hit in the head with a puck at a Langford 2014 roller hockey game can keep the full amount.
The case stems from May 2014, when Sherry Lynn Matthews was watching her son play in a roller hockey game at Langford’s Eagle Ridge Hockey Arena, according to a June 6 unanimous decision from a three-judge panel.
“A puck travelled through a break in the safety netting, and struck (Matthews) over her right eye,” wrote appeal court Justice Karen Horsman.
Matthews developed a “visible mark and swelling above her eye” within minutes of the impact, Horsman added, noting it was unclear whether the woman later lost consciousness while resting alone at a nearby table.
The judge said Matthews began to suffer nausea, headaches, and light sensitivity. She was taken to hospital and underwent a CT scan, which indicated a fracture to her nose. Horsman said it was unclear whether it was a new injury or an old one aggravated by the puck strike.
Matthews later sued the City of Langford, Performance Plus Hockey Inc., Greg Smith, a John Doe and Eagle Ridge Roller Hockey Team. In April 2023, a jury in the case awarded Matthews $804,000 for loss of past earning capacity, $11,000 for loss of future earning capacity, $60,000 for the cost of future care and $175,000 for non-pecuniary loss — the latter a category of damages that includes pain and suffering; emotional trauma and a diminished quality of life.
In the appeal decision, Horsman said that before the incident Matthews had been offered a lucrative contract selling credit card and debit machines. But after being struck in the head by a puck, her work began to decline. The woman had not worked in the two years prior to the trial, said the judge.
Matthews testified at trial that the injuries severely impacted her life, leaving her unable to work or manage day-to-day household activities. She testified to experiencing ongoing severe headaches, vision and breathing problems, cognitive difficulties, and low energy and motivation.
The court also heard from experts who testified Matthews had suffered a mild traumatic brain injury leading to a neurocognitive disorder, persistent depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder and impairment of executive functioning skills.
The defendants admitted liability but did not agree on the nature of Matthews’ injuries or the amount of damages, according to the appeal ruling.
The defendants maintained the accident did not cause Matthews significant physical or psychological harm. They said her post-accident symptoms were causally related to her pre-existing depression, anxiety, and headaches. They also argued Matthews was not a credible witness, something that undermined the reliability of her expert evidence.
The defendants appealed the awards for loss of past earning capacity and non-pecuniary loss.
Horsman disagreed, noting in the ruling that the $175,000 award for non-pecuniary loss was not “wholly disproportionate or shockingly unreasonable.”
And when it came to the $804,000 for past loss of earning capacity, the judge said “it was open to a properly instructed jury, acting judicially, to assess damages.”
