judge denied of $54 million pants case

Posted on June 25, 2007


” . . . The plaintiff is not entitled to any relief whatsoever.”

Hallelujah! Thank goodness common sense has prevailed. There’s hope for the US justice system yet.

The DC Superior Court has dismissed the frivolous lawsuit brought by an administrative judge, Roy Pearson, against his neighborhood dry-cleaners, Korean immigrants, the Chungs.

Pearson had sued the Chungs for a whooping $54 million, all because they had misplaced his pair of pants. Better yet, Pearson has to pay the administrative costs for the Chungs.

Pearson may also have to pay the Chungs’ legal costs, which could cost him tens of thousands of dollars. At the same time, his job as an administrative judge is hanging on the line, after his case came to light and provoked an uproar by the public angry at his bullying and abuse of the justice system over a frivolous suit.

The sorry saga started two years ago, when Pearson brought a pair of pants to the Chungs for alterations and the Chungs initially misplaced. They were found later and the Chungs tried to return them to Pearson, but he claims that they were not his and accused them of defrauding him.

He rejected several attempts at settlement of sums from $3,000 to $12,000. Arguing that he did not receive service that qualified as “satisfaction guaranteed” as promised on the sign in the Chungs’ shop, he sued for the incredible (and much derided) amount. The exorbitant amount was based on the city’s fine for violation of consumer protection laws, at $1,500 a day. Also included in the sum was the car rental fees that Pearson calculated he would need to ferry his dry-cleaning to a dry-cleaner in a different area, mental anguish and attorney’s fees, even though he represented himself. The $54 million is a reduction of an original sum of $65 million he had asked for.

Pearson’s greed and excessive bullying behavior has captured world-wide attention and prompted calls for him to be disbarred.

He should be feeling pretty shitty about himself. The Chungs had said, post-verdict, that they were just relieved at winning the case and bore him no ill-will. They even said they would welcome him back as a customer. Are they nuts? After all this, Pearson should be banned from going to a dry-cleaner ever again!

Pearson could, of course, still appeal the verdict. However, it seems unlikely that he’d get anything, not only because of how ridiculous his suit is, but also due to the tide of public opinion against him. He only has himself to blame.

Posted in: business, greed, justice, law, US