He brought one pair in for alterations and they went missing -- gray trousers with what Pearson has described in court papers as having blue and red stripes on them.

First, Pearson demanded $1,150 for a new suit. Lawyers were hired, legal wrangling ensured, and eventually the Chungs offered Pearson $3000 in compensation.

No dice.

Then they offered him $4,600.

No dice.

Finally, they offered $12,000 for the missing gray trousers with the red and blue stripes.

Pearson said no.

With neither satisfaction nor his prized gray pants, Pearson upped the ante considerably.

The judge went to the lawbooks. Citing the District of Columbia's consumer protection laws, he claims he was entitled to $1,500 per violation.

Per day.

What follows was the beginning of thousands of pages of legal documents and correspondence that -- two years later -- has led to a massive civil lawsuit in the amount of $67 million dollars.

According to court papers, here's how Pearson calculates the damages and legal fees:

He believes he is entitled to $1,500 for each violation, each day during which the "Satisfaction Guaranteed'' sign, and another sign promising "Same Day Service'' was up in the store -- more than 1200 days.

And he's multiplying each violation by three because he's suing Jin and Soo Chung and their son.

He also wants $500,000 in 'emotional damages' and another $542, 500 in legal fees, even though he is representing himself in court.

He wants $15,000 for ten years worth of weekend car rentals as well.
http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/Story?id=3119381&page=1

Seeing **** like this makes me angry beyond words.

The plaintiff is not only a lawyer, he is a judge too.


Personally, he should be fined the 67 Mil.
And disbarred.

And forced to repay the taxpayers for all of their money that he's pissing away on this frivolous bull****.

This thread wouldn't be complete without an asterisk-laden post by Aidon, explaining to us how frivolous lawsuits can't happen, and we don't need tort reform.

If the case is dismissed and Pearson has to pay all the legal costs then there is no need for tort reform.

Can't the dry cleaners even countersue for malicious litigation?

If the case is dismissed and Pearson has to pay all the legal costs then there is no need for tort reform.

Can't the dry cleaners even countersue for malicious litigation?

Of course one might consider the years of harassment that the 'defendant' have had to endure. And the thousands of dollars in expense, and the thousands of dollars in personal opportunity costs spent.

And that others are open to this same sort of legal harassment and costs in the future, or present.

And might want to reform the system to prevent the abuse from happening in those cases, and punishing this judge may send a message to any other like minded lawyers...

Aidon loves punitive verdicts, if a rational and reasonable judge were to decide that the plaintiff is the one at fault, the person liable, then I would agree with him that a sizable punishment would fit in this case, say 67 million or so. I would agree with Aidon in that case that the verdict or settlement was fair.

This was funny until I saw the mom & pop dry cleaning business that are the victims of this frivolous lawsuit. Seeing them trying to cope with this crap just makes me very angry.

Yea this is so stupid. I can only hope that a jury of my peers throws this back in the judge's face. $12,000 for a pair of pants is way over the top.

Umm,,,

He does not want 12K.

He wants 67 million dollars now.

The worst part, the part that really pissed me off is he's taken his figures and multiplied them by 3, he's suing the whole family....

This guy gives bad judges and lawyers a good name...

Umm,,,

He does not want 12K.

He wants 67 million dollars now.Right, they OFFERED the abuser $12K and he turned it down.

Hey, he's just suing the pants off them... :p

Without bothering to read the article...

A) What is asked for the complaint of a lawsuit and what is actually sought, or expected, bear little to no resemblance to each other.

B) The suit seems fairly ridiculous, on its face, from what little i've read (toku's post). Either the plaintiff is an asshat, or the defendant did something to really really piss him off. Either way, the most likely scenario will be the judge its before sitting down with the plaintiff and very strongly suggesting that he accept their settlement offer.

On the other hand, my gut reaction to reading Toku's post was "what did they do that pissed this guy off so much?"

I thought the same thing too Aiden... HOWEVER, maybe im wrong but I hold our JUDGES to a higher standard then lawyers, this is petty and nothing but a sink on time and money.

He's acting like a little kid waving around the big guns just becuase he could, at someone who's pissed him off.

He's an "administrative judge".

I'm not exactly sure what an "administrative judge" is...

He's an "administrative judge".

I'm not exactly sure what an "administrative judge" is...A lawyer hired by an administrative agency to preside over their cases (e.g., tax, immigration, social security, and so on).

They're not real judges in the Constitution's article III sense, but still, they should be held to a higher standard.

Judge leaves courtroom in tears:

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/judge-pants-cleaner-lawsuit/20070612164509990001

Well... the judge sounds rather addled. It kind of reminds me of how passionate my Dad could get over something really trivial. I think it was an early indication of his Alzheimer's.

We need a better screening process for our judges. Criteria such as, not psycho.

Why hasn't this been thrown out yet?

Why hasn't this been thrown out yet?Because our legal system is a pathetic joke?

No, it hasn't been thrown out because, at its core, it is a valid claim. His demand is outlandish...but the core question of law before the jury is valid and they could very easily decide in his favor and award him an amount they feel is appropriate (say the thousand dollars he claims the suit is worth).

Merely making a demand for an outrageous amount is not cause for dismissal, as the jury gets to decide not only liability, but damages, as well.

Though, it does pose an interesting question regarding venue...I don't know DC rules, but most states have a minimum amount of damages required before you can file in common pleas (county) versus municipal court or small claims court. I don't know if a common pleas judge has the authority to remove the case to a municipal court based on his belief that the damages are not reasonably greater than the threshold. Evidently, though, Superior Court in DC has a threshold of $5,000 dollars, so it is not unreasonable that an amount awarded could exceed that threshold.

Is he being unreasonable in not having settled this long before? Certainly, but I'm guessing the Defendants did something to piss him off, because frankly, you don't spend the time and effort to litigate in this situation unless you're pissed off. Or the guy could just be off his rocker.

Regardless, his underlying complaint and claim is valid under the law and reasonable men could very well decide in the plaintiff's favor regarding liability, thus there is no grounds for dismissal, regardless of his demand.

So he's now dropped his demands for damages regarding the lost pants. He's refocused on the two signs that read "Satisfaction Guaranteed" and "Same-Day Service".

... and he cried in court after talking about his lost pants? Maybe some kind of psychiatric assessment is appropriate.

Maybe they were his lucky pants?

I hope they're his unlucky pants.

They offered him TWELVE THOUSAND DOLLARS for his lost pants, when he refused that the case should of been dismissed due to his vindictive idiocy.

I should HOPE a jury wouldnt award more then that for the pants...

The award SHOULD be 54 million dollars.

For the defendants.


This guy obviously should not be a judge in any respect. He should be these Chinese cleaners' personal slave for the rest of his life.

i think they are korean...

but hey they are asian close enough!

How do you get your shirts so clean, Mr. Lee?

Ancient Kor-Ean Seek-Ret.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojm1Xzwlc9Q

... and he cried in court after talking about his lost pants?

I think this is a new requirement for Judges, maybe because more of them are on T.V. ? Did anyone see that Judge in that fiasco of a trial in the Bahama's for Anna Nicole? Seriously... how can you respect a Judge that gets so emotional over absolutely ridiculous things?

Did anyone see that Judge in that fiasco of a trial in the Bahama's for Anna Nicole? Seriously... how can you respect a Judge that gets so emotional over absolutely ridiculous things?
Good god... you watched it? :p Madie!

I know I know... *hangs her head in shame* but I had to watch SOMETHING while I wasted my Tuesday nights scrapbooking!!

Actually when I scrapbook at my friends on Tuesdays - we watch Nancy Grace (Her favorite show /boggle) and Nancy Grace did about 2 solid weeks on the whole Anna Nicole saga... was sort of tragic really.

Isn't Grace the newscaster who talked a woman into killing herself?

Isn't Grace the newscaster who talked a woman into killing herself?

Kinda sorta - she had a young hispanic woman on her show that had recently had her 5 year old daughter abducted from her home. I did not watch the show, but supposedly Nancy Grace berrated the woman so much about how she could not know someone took her daughter that the woman went home and killed herself.

Since I do watch that ridiculous show just about every Tuesday, I will have to say that Nancy Grace is mostly just a bunch of fluff and she is hilarious when she talks to the lawyers on the show. But it is not a show that I would watch on my own. I really don't see a value in it - even from an entertainment point of view.

Scrapbooking... now there's a noun made into a verb and even more surprising it is a verb you can do once a week as a hobby! *lol* Your friend needs a PBS intervention I think.

What do you put in your scrapbook? I'm trying to think of what I could put into a scrapbook... the rings from off of milk jugs, fur my cat has shed, gum wrappers and toilet paper that stuck to my shoe. Yeah!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070625/ap_on_re_us/67_million_pants;_ylt=AoJmr3irydJC4gsDYyPa7pBH2ocA


It's a shame they were put through this, at least he is responsible for their court cost.

More on this:

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/dry-cleaner-wins-in-missing-pants-case/20070625102609990002

I hope Madie scrapbooks that!

It's a shame they were put through this, at least he is responsible for their court cost.But not attorney's fees (at least not yet). ("Court costs" are just little things like filing and copying fees.)

And the judge wasn't fined for abusing the system, either. In fact, he plans to appeal.

This ruling doesn't rehabilitate the image of our legal system one bit.

But not attorney's fees (at least not yet). ("Court costs" are just little things like filing and copying fees.)

And the judge wasn't fined for abusing the system, either. In fact, he plans to appeal.

This ruling doesn't rehabilitate the image of our legal system one bit.

If you read the ****ing article, you illiterate nincompoop, you would have seen that the defendants intend on asking the Judge to issue sanctions for the plaintiff to pay attorneys fees. I know you have the patience of a hyperactive three year old, but why don't you continue waiting to see what the **** happens, instead of whining like a little bitch at every ****ing step of the scenario, as you always do when you hear one of the rare instances of ridiculousness in our court systems.

But I don't know why I bother. The judge could order the defendant to strip naked and be beaten by raspberry bush branches while handing the plaintiff's hundred dollar bills for every thorny whipping and you'd still say it wasn't sufficient.

If you read the ****ing article, you illiterate nincompoop, you would have seen that the defendants intend on asking the Judge to issue sanctions for the plaintiff to pay attorneys fees.And if you read my response, you'll see I acknowledged that.

But there's no guarantee they'll get those back, even as they now spend more attorney's fees just to try to get the attorney's fees. And even in the best case scenario, it's only partial compensation for their losses. Not to mention, the psycho judge plans to appeal, perpetuating his shenanigans and costing the victims here even more time and money.

Oh and let's not forget how our taxpayer dollars are pissed away at every step of the process.

Nope, there's nothing wrong with our legal system, nothing at all. <img src=http://lag9.com/rolleyes.gif>

From the second article, discussing how many people were packed into the courtroom to hear the 2 day trial:


It even overshadowed the drunken driving trial of former Mayor Marion Barry.

ROFLMAO

Good God!! Can that man stay out of trouble for just 1 year????

I hope Madie scrapbooks that!

The proper term would be Scraps that!! And I could ya know... just need a pic of the offending pants, some colorful paper and maybe even some lettering in Korean!!

You want pants hemmed? 54 million.

The proper term would be Scraps that!! And I could ya know... just need a pic of the offending pants, some colorful paper and maybe even some lettering in Korean!!
There's my thing learned today. :)

If you read the ****ing article, you illiterate nincompoop, you would have seen that the defendants intend on asking the Judge to issue sanctions for the plaintiff to pay attorneys fees. I know you have the patience of a hyperactive three year old, but why don't you continue waiting to see what the **** happens, instead of whining like a little bitch at every ****ing step of the scenario, as you always do when you hear one of the rare instances of ridiculousness in our court systems.And what happened? The cleaners are still out $100,000 in legal fees, and have been awarded nothing from the court.

But the American Tort Reform Association held a fund-raiser in their honor (http://www.nypost.com/seven/07252007/news/nationalnews/pants_take_up_lacks_nationalnews_.htm) and collected $64,000 to defray those costs.

This is justice to you?

Well, his dad fed him, clothed him, housed him, and sent him to school with hundreds of those little payoffs(or if he is as good as I assume, big).

You really can't wonder why he defends the insanity. And their industry.

A vampire does not think of itself as evil.

$100,000 in legal fees is ridiculous anyway. It shouldn't cost that much to show the judge the trousers, show the judge the laundry ticket, then make a settlement or get the case thrown out.

$100,000 in legal fees is ridiculous anyway.Actually, $100K is trivial for a case through trial.It shouldn't cost that much to show the judge the trousers, show the judge the laundry ticket, then make a settlement or get the case thrown out.Ah, I see the source of your misunderstanding. You think our legal system is really that efficient.

A vampire does not think of itself as evil.You're assuming Aidon really buys his own bull****, and isn't just spouting propaganda to help fill his bank account.

You're assuming Aidon really buys his own bull****, and isn't just spouting propaganda to help fill his bank account.

Tudamorf, that is a very nasty thing to say of anybody ...


Eri

Tudamorf, that is a very nasty thing to say of anybody ...How so? People lie to make money all the time. It is, in fact, the primary skill of most lawyers, to take a position they don't personally agree with, and convince other people that it's true, to get paid.

Ok so now I have a face to the guy I absolutely despise, and he'd been fired.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/30/AR2007103002058.html?hpid=moreheadlines

Thank god is all I can say, though I swear if he turns around and tries to sue im going to have to take a little trip.

:axe:

What I am sad to hear is this incident caused the family to sell the business in question due to lost customers while defending themselves.

The dry cleaning family lost their store over that ****?

Tort reform needs to be enacted asap, so that this sort of lawsuit is impossible to file.

I am not sure how or what steps would be needed, but this should never happen.

I could say a number of things that should happen to the man that started it, but most would be illegal, and all would be immoral, so I'll just have to hope he'll get his comeuppance one day.

:twak:

They didnt lose it, they sold it because their reputation was fubar after the incident.

They didnt lose it, they sold it because their reputation was fubar after the incident.
Maybe they should sue the guy back. In California, at least, you can sue for negligent interference with prospective economic advantage.