The 67 Million Dollar Pants

[MJS]

It'll be interesting to see how this turns out. If it wasn't for the fact that this guy is a lawyer, I don't think anyone else would've thought to sue like this guy is doing.

A $10 dry cleaning bill for a pair of trousers has ballooned into a $67 million civil lawsuit.
Plaintiff Roy Pearson, a judge in Washington, D.C., says in court papers that he's been through the ringer over a lost pair of prized pants he wanted to wear on his first day on the bench.
He says in court papers that he has endured "mental suffering, inconvenience and discomfort."
He says he was unable to wear that favorite suit on his first day of work.
He's suing for 10 years of weekend car rentals so he can transport his dry cleaning to another store.

More

 

[mrhnau]

It'll be interesting to see how this turns out. If it wasn't for the fact that this guy is a lawyer, I don't think anyone else would've thought to sue like this guy is doing.



More

I'd seen the headlines, and wondered where he got that 67 million dollar number from. Now, he is transporting his clothes using a brand new hummer each time and going to California or something? I mean, if I add up my weekly grocery store runs over the next 10 years, I get a number near 67 million? I never knew how rich I was!

 

[PatMunk]

Looks to me like the dry cleaners have a pretty good law suit against the judge after all this is dismissed ...

What goes around comes around ...

 

[Ping898]

I'd seen the headlines, and wondered where he got that 67 million dollar number from. Now, he is transporting his clothes using a brand new hummer each time and going to California or something? I mean, if I add up my weekly grocery store runs over the next 10 years, I get a number near 67 million? I never knew how rich I was!

I heard it was 65 mil, but anyways, he got the figure by calculating for 10 years what it would cost for him to rent a car every weekend to take his dry cleaning some place else and then taking a strict view of the $1,500 per day per violation fine for about 1200 times the 3 people he is suing....

I also read that people are now pushing for him to be removed from his judg-ing post, I guess he is up for reappointment. I hope he gets his just desserts...

 

[Ceicei]

Throw his lawsuit out and disbar him for filing frivolously. I understand he has an attachment to wearing a specific suit on his first day on the bar, but he needs to grow up. This is beginning to sound like my 4 and 6 year old children who throw fits for not being able to wear a specific outfit despite other clothes being available.

What's more, the dry cleaners did say they located his pants shortly after it went missing (a week) and tried to return it to him (he refused). They probably will counter-sue.

There seem to be a well written summary with less emotional spin at this link (FindLaw News):

http://public.findlaw.com/pnews/news/ap/o/632/05-04-2007/829900266695a263.html

- Ceicei

 

[Flying Crane]

apparently the dry cleaners tried to settle with him for $3000, then $4600, then $12000, but he refused.

Clearly this is a vindictive person who has absolutely no business sitting on the bench in a court of law. I can't think of any reason to pursue a case like this, esp. considering the settlement offers that he rejected which were far too generous, other than to maliciously destroy the lives of the defendants. He should lose his judgeship, and be disbarred forever. I would also suggest that all of the cases that he heard in his entire career should be reviewed.

 

[Kacey]

This ******* is a judge?!?!??! That's just horrid. I particularly like the part where he tried to make it a class action lawsuit, got no takers, and then upped his lawsuit repeatedly. The owners of the dry cleaners appear to have a lovely countersuit - I hope they take this idiot for all he's worth and all he'll make in the next several decades... of course, if he gets kicked off the bench - as he certainly should be - that might cut his earning potentil way down.

 

[MA-Caver]

Stupid, just plain stupid.

 

[Ceicei]

Latest news:

The guy (I refuse to call him a judge) who sued for $54 million dollars over his missing pants lost his case. At least the judge hearing this case made the correct call.

Judge rules in favor of dry cleaner sued over missing pants

[FONT=Verdana,Helvetica,Arial]Associated Press[/FONT]

WASHINGTON — A judge ruled Monday in favor of a dry cleaner that was sued for $54 million over a missing pair of pants. The owners of Custom Cleaners did not violate the city's Consumer Protection Act by failing to live up to Roy L. Pearson's expectations of the "Satisfaction Guaranteed" sign once displayed in the store window, District of Columbia Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff ruled.

More....

http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,680193837,00.html

I'm glad this case is over....

- Ceicei

 

[Ping898]

HAHA....CC beat me to it by 2 min....oops....oh well....I will go with great minds think alike

Nice to see this as the outcome.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070625/ap_on_fe_st/67_million_pants

Dry cleaner wins in missing-pants case


District of Columbia Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff ruled that the Korean immigrant owners of Custom Cleaners did not violate the city's Consumer Protection Act by failing to live up to Roy L. Pearson's expectations of the "Satisfaction Guaranteed" sign that was once placed in the store window.

"Plaintiff Roy L. Pearson, Jr. takes nothing from the defendants, and defendants Soo Chung, Jin Nam Chung and Ki Y. Chung are awarded the costs of this action against the plaintiff Roy L. Pearson, Jr.," the ruling read.
Pearson, an administrative law judge, originally sought $67 million from the Chungs after he claimed they lost a pair of suit trousers and later tried to return a pair that he said was not his. He arrived at the figure by adding up years of law violations and almost $2 million in common law claims. Pearson later dropped demands for damages related to the pants and focused his claims on signs in the shop, which have since been removed.
Chris Manning, the Chungs' attorney, countered that no reasonable person would interpret the signs to be an unconditional promise of satisfaction.

 

[Kacey]

I think the part I appreciate most in this verdict is that the defendants were awarded their court costs. The plaintiff (I'm will Ceicei on this - I won't call him a judge) is a putz, and if it wouldn't be so much trouble for the defendants, I'd say they should file a counter-suit for damages.

 

[Monadnock]

This ******* is a judge?!?!??!

A DC Judge no less...

 

[jdinca]

Just because you're a judge doesn't mean you're intelligent. It's the 99% of the lawyers in the world make the rest look bad.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Well fortunately it was resolved with some common sence and this judge will hopefully learn a valuable lesson.

 

[michaeledward]

Now if we could get Mr. Bork to drop his lawsuit.

 

[jks9199]

Actually -- an administrative law judge. Still a judge, but with narrow jurisdiction. And, at least according to several reports I've read, he was already on the way out as a judge, too.

 

[terryl965]

The American way sue sue and sue, I'm sure he will file some type of lawsuit again.

 

[Ceicei]

Sad.... He doesn't seem to know when to stop.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19795632/

WASHINGTON - A customer who sued his dry cleaner for $54 million over a missing pair of pants has been denied in his efforts to get the judge in the widely mocked case to reconsider her decision.

<snip>

The attorneys for the dry cleaners told NBC they fully expect Pearson to continue his crusade and file an appeal of the original decision within the next few weeks.