$65M lawsuit over lost pants

[Teutatis]

Check out what one scumbag, lowlife, bloodsucking lawyer (also a judge) is trying to do.

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/210362

$65M lawsuit over lost pants

Jacquelyn Martin / AP Photo
Jin Nam Chung and Ki Chung, owners of Custom Cleaners in Washington, have offered a customer $12,000 in compensation for a pair of lost pants. Email story
Print
Choose text size
Report typo or correction Tag and save

Washington judge suing after store lost trousers taken in for alterations

May 04, 2007 04:30 AM
Lubna Takruri
ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON–A missing pair of pants has led to one big suit.

A customer got so steamed when a dry cleaner lost his trousers that he sued for $65 million (U.S.). Two years later, he is still pressing his suit.

The case has demoralized the South Korean immigrant owners and brought demands that the customer – an administrative law judge in Washington – be disbarred and removed from office for pursuing a frivolous and abusive claim.

"They're out a lot of money, but more importantly, incredibly disenchanted with the system," said Chris Manning, lawyer for the owners. "This has destroyed their lives."

The customer, Roy Pearson Jr., who has been representing himself, declined to comment.

According to court documents, the problem began in May 2005 when Pearson became a judge and brought several suits for alterations to Custom Cleaners in Washington. A pair of pants from one suit was missing when he requested it two days later.

Pearson asked the cleaners for the full price of the suit: more than $1,000.

But a week later, the owners said the pants had been found and refused to pay. Pearson said those were not his pants and decided to sue.

Manning said the cleaners have made three settlement offers to Pearson: $3,000, then $4,600, then $12,000.

But Pearson was not satisfied and expanded his calculations beyond one pair of pants. Because he no longer wanted to use his local dry cleaner, he asked in his lawsuit for $15,000 – the cost of renting a car every weekend for 10 years to go to another business.

The bulk of the $65 million demand comes from Pearson's strict interpretation of Washington consumer protection law, which imposes fines of $1,500 per violation, per day. Pearson counted 12 violations over 1,200 days, then multiplied that by three defendants.

Much of Pearson's case rests on two signs Custom Cleaners once had on its walls: "Satisfaction Guaranteed" and "Same Day Service." He claims the signs amount to fraud.

The case is set for trial June 11.

Sherman Joyce, president of the American Tort Reform Association, an organization that fights what it considers abusive lawsuits against small businesses, has asked that Pearson be denied a renewal of his 10-year appointment. The association has also offered to buy Pearson a new suit.

Chief Administrative Judge Tyrone Butler had no comment on Pearson's reappointment prospects.

Melvin Welles, former chief administrative law judge with the National Labour Relations Board, wrote to The Washington Post to say that if he were the judge in the case, he would throw out the lawsuit and order Pearson to pay the dry cleaners for their legal expenses and their mental suffering. He also called for Pearson's ouster and disbarment.

"The manifest absurdity of it is too obvious to require explanation," he wrote.

[Epicurus8a]

I saw this on the news the other day. This judge is wacko and should be in a straight jacket.

[hudsonf]

A customer got so steamed when a dry cleaner lost his trousers that he sued for $65 million (U.S.). Two years later, he is still pressing his suit.

[thecoalman]

Ridiculous to say the least, hopefully he loses and the dry cleaners sue him and win. Least they are getting a lot of free advertising out of it, I'll bet their business is booming.

[highvolumeJP]

Customer STEAMED ? Still PRESSING SUIT ? LOL !!! Is this article for real ?

$65 million huh ? I guess you can say someone is getting sent to the "cleaners"........ LITTERALY!

How is the owner expected to cough up $65 million anyways ? Selling his shirt (or pants) won't cover it !

P.S. The judge left out emotional distress, he should ask for an additional 35mill, for a nice even $100mill - I'd personally settle for $50Millions out o court

[KBeee]

They should sue the pants off him

[guns1inger]

We have just had a case over here where a man (representing himself, as no self-respecting lawyer would touch it) sued Philip-Morris for AU$100.1 Million. He claims that he was unaware of the risk of smoking from the time he started in 1973 (after the surgeon general's warning were printed on every packet) until 1985, when his wide pointed out that smoking might not be good for him. From that point on, he claims, he was unable to give up, and has since been diagnosed with lung disease and emphysema (which even his own doctor describes as being very mild and at the bottom end of the scale). Even after the diagnosis over 5 years ago, he has not given up smoking, and now wants money for his trouble.

He had to get leave from the supreme court to pursue the matter, as he had already been named as a vexatious litigant in the past.

If all the noise was taken out of the court system by forcing reason and responsibility into the criteria for bringing suit, the criminal justice side of things would run much faster as well.

[rallynavvie]

Could they file a countersuit for harassment on the guy?

What are the laws on frivolous lawsuits like these in other countries? I think things are getting a ridiculous here, maybe I need to move to Canada...

[adam]

Harassment actually is a tort (type of civil action) but I don't believe its possible to commit harassment by lawsuit. The reason is that each state has a specific sanction for frivilous lawsuits (or individual motions) so that's your remedy. Whenever someone files a frivilous lawsuit where there is no good faith belief that they can prevail, and it just amounts to delay or harassment, the remedy is to have the suit thrown out and for sanctions to be imposed. That typically means that the other party has their attorney's fees and expenses paid for and it can also mean that the sanctioned party pays a fine either to the other party or to the state. If that doesn't happen in this case than I'll eat those pants.

True harassment carries criminal penalties, and like I said it can't be accomplished through a lawsuit. Its funny watching the People's Court or any of those other blatantly fake tv court shows. The Defendant always counterclaims for harassment for having to defend themself. There's no such thing.

[AlecWest]

Just my 2 cents here. Over the years, I've seen a lot of press given to so-called "frivolous" lawsuits. Yet, in many cases, these judgements have come down in favor of the plaintiff as a result of a decision by a jury. And sometimes, when the actual court transcripts of these "frivolous" lawsuits are examined, they begin to seem less "frivolous" than they might have appeared in the media ... and the jury making the award more in touch with the totality of the case than the context touched on by the media.

The devil is in the details, sometimes.