DVD Talk Forum

DVD Talk Forum (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/)
-   Other Talk (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/other-talk-9/)
-   -   Judge sues cleaner for $65M over pants (update: Judge loses job) (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/other-talk/499602-judge-sues-cleaner-%2465m-over-pants-update-judge-loses-job.html)

Minor Threat 08-15-07 09:49 AM


Originally Posted by LurkerDan
I think it's clear that he has some serious mental issues. As for harassment, I don't know that he's done anything illegal, although as has been discussed in this thread already, there's some disagreement as to whether his conduct resorts to sanctionable behavior.

Simply put the guy's a ginormous fucktard.....

Sweet Baby James 08-15-07 10:12 AM


Originally Posted by Minor Threat
Simply put the guy's a ginormous fucktard.....

Eloquently stated.:D

DVD Josh 08-15-07 10:13 AM


Originally Posted by Brian Shannon
That is so very sad.

You've heard the saying Brian - if the law does not protect the very worst of us, the rest of us surely have no chance.

big whoppa 08-15-07 05:13 PM

The guy lacks any humanity or compassion.

printerati 09-20-07 07:54 AM

Cleaner Closes In Wake Of Pants Lawsuit


(AP) The owners of a dry cleaner who were sued for $54 million over a missing pair of pants have closed shop and sold the business, their attorney said Wednesday.

The South Korean immigrants are citing a loss of revenue and the emotional strain of defending the lawsuit.

"This is a truly tragic example of how devastating frivolous litigation can be to the American people and to small businesses," their attorney, Chris Manning, said in a statement.

Soo Chung and her husband Jin Nam Chung spent more than two years in litigation after a former customer at Custom Cleaners alleged they had lost a pair of his pants, then sued for $67 million under the District of Columbia's strict consumer protection act.

Plaintiff Roy L. Pearson, a local administrative law judge, later lowered his demand to $54 million. He said the "Satisfaction Guaranteed" and "Same Day Service" signs that once hung in the shop were misleading and fraudulent.

The case went to trial in June and a D.C. Superior Court judge ruled in favor of the Chungs, awarding Pearson nothing. Pearson is appealing.

The Chungs spent more than $100,000 for the lawsuit, expenses which eventually were paid with help from fundraisers and donations.

When Pearson began fighting with the dry cleaner in 2005, he plastered the neighborhood with signs alleging unfair business practices and encouraging patrons to avoid the store. Even after the trial ended favorably, Manning said, the Chungs lost customers and revenue.

The financial strain and the emotional toll led to the store's closure, Manning said.

Pearson did not respond to an e-mail from The Associated Press seeking comment.

The Chungs have now closed two of their three businesses since the lawsuit began, Manning said. The couple will devote their energy to their remaining business, Happy Cleaners in Northwest Washington.

"It's sad, but what they're trying to do is move on and return to their private lives," Manning said. The family is hoping that the success of Happy Cleaners eventually will help them rebuild their businesses, he said.
:(

atari2600 09-20-07 02:32 PM

horrible. the stupid guy who sued them shoudl be held accountable for all this.

CPA-ESQ. 09-20-07 02:41 PM

Looks like the Chungs are setting themselves up to sue Pearson :) I hope they do.

By closing these businesses and citing a "loss of revenue" directly related to Mr. Pearson's actions is what they need to do to have a large punitive judgment awarded.


Just a guess...

ernestrp 09-20-07 02:46 PM


Originally Posted by CPA-ESQ.
Looks like the Chungs are setting themselves up to sue Pearson :) I hope they do.

By closing these businesses and citing a "loss of revenue" directly related to Mr. Pearson's actions is what they need to do to have a large punitive judgment awarded.


Just a guess...

I dont know that Pearson has that kind of money. While I do think they would be likely to win, I doubt they would ever collect what the judgement would be.

-popcorn-

Minor Threat 09-20-07 02:53 PM

:mad:

Brian Shannon 09-20-07 04:21 PM


Originally Posted by DVD Josh
You've heard the saying Brian - if the law does not protect the very worst of us, the rest of us surely have no chance.

And based on the way this is proceeding the rest of us surely do have no chance.

DVD Josh 09-20-07 11:48 PM


Originally Posted by Brian Shannon
And based on the way this is proceeding the rest of us surely do have no chance.

I'm not going to cry too many tears for the Chungs. They didn't pay anything out of pocket for their legal bills. Donations took care of that and the lawyer cut his bill for the rest. Their business went up thanks to the publicity. And they made some money on the sale of their business.

I hope no one forgets that this all started by the store losing the pants, at first refusing to make good, and then tried to give him someone else's pants. They only started to attempt settlement when the legal stuff began.

They certain got more than they deserved, by about a million percent. But this could have been avoided fairly easily.

You learn in law school in the famous "eggshell skull" cases that a defendant chooses his plaintiff at his own peril. We can add this one to the list of those cases.

Just to make clear, I think Pearson is a total nimrod who took a personal vendetta against a dry cleaner to the end of the earth, and will suffer most deservedly for it both professionally and personally.

DVD Polizei 09-21-07 12:40 AM

Personally, I hope the guy gets chased out of the state or drowns in Korean Food.

GradVT06 10-23-07 10:32 AM

By Andrew Harris
Oct. 23 (Bloomberg) -- Roy L. Pearson Jr., the judge who
demanded $54 million in damages from a Washington dry cleaner
he sued for losing his pants, will lose his job, the
Washington Post reported.
The District of Columbia's Commission on Selection and
Tenure of Administrative Law Judges yesterday decided against
reappointing Pearson, who was eligible for a 10-year term.
Because the panel hasn't drafted a formal notice, the ruling
isn't yet final, the paper said today, citing unnamed sources.
Pearson sued Custom Cleaners in 2005, accusing the family-
run business of losing a pair of pants he had brought in for
alterations costing $10.50, and rejecting a proffered pair of
slacks he said weren't his. A D.C. Superior Court judge ruled in
favor of the cleaners after a trial in June. Pearson, who came
under widespread criticism for seeking tens of millions of
dollars in damages for the lost trousers, is appealing.
Pearson, 57, didn't respond to requests for comment,
according to the Post. He can appeal the commission's ruling to
the D.C. Court of Appeals, the same body he has asked to hear
his appeal of the dry cleaning decision. Pearson had claimed the
cleaners breached a posted promise of ``satisfaction
guaranteed,'' violating a D.C. consumer protection law.
The case is Pearson v. Chung, No. 05-CA-4302, Superior
Court for the District of Columbia.

CPA-ESQ. 10-23-07 10:36 AM

Well this is good news :thumbsup:

I'm sure he will appeal.... wonder if he will use the race card?

Giles 10-23-07 10:43 AM


Originally Posted by CPA-ESQ.
Well this is good news :thumbsup:

I'm sure he will appeal.... wonder if he will use the race card?

given his stupidity - yes.

mrpayroll 10-24-07 12:11 AM


Originally Posted by CPA-ESQ.
Well this is good news :thumbsup:

I'm sure he will appeal.... wonder if he will use the race card?

What, is he white?

Chris

zekeburger1979 10-24-07 12:34 AM


Originally Posted by mrpayroll
What, is he white?

Chris

No, he's black.

mrpayroll 10-24-07 10:32 AM


Originally Posted by zekeburger1979
No, he's black.

I was kinda joking! ;)

Chris

bhk 10-31-07 05:39 PM

http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=596&sid=1275886

Man in $54M Pants Lawsuit Loses Job
October 31, 2007 - 11:55am


Roy Pearson has been under fire since he sued Custom Cleaners. (AP) WASHINGTON -- An administrative law judge who sued a D.C. dry cleaner for $54 million has lost his job.
Administrative Law Judge Roy Pearson had a seven-page letter delivered to him Tuesday. The letter described the reasons a D.C. panel voted against reappointing him to the bench.

Pearson had 90 minutes to gather his belongings and leave his office, sources tell The Washington Post.

The panel reached a decision based on Pearson's work and temperament as a judge and the $54 million lawsuit.

Pearson was appointed in 2005 to an initial two-year term, which expired in May. He requested to be appointed for a 10-year term.

The $54 million pants suit saga began when Pearson filed a civil suit against Jin Nam and Ki Chung, the owners of Custom Cleaners in Northeast, for losing a pair of pants and using signs that Pearson claimed were deceptive.

In June, Judge Judith Bartnoff ruled that the Chungs did not violate the consumer protection law by failing to live up to Pearson's expectations of the "Satisfaction Guaranteed" sign once displayed in the store.

The Chungs sold the business because of the revenue losses and emotional toll the family suffered as a result of the lawsuit.

(Copyright 2007 by WTOP. All Rights Reserved.)

Ha ha. Justice would be that this loser is forced to pay the Chungs a lot of money.

ernestrp 05-06-08 04:43 PM

Former judge from ‘pants suit’ sues for $1 million, old job back


WASHINGTON (Map, News) - The former D.C. judge who was fired after becoming a symbol of runaway litigation for suing over lost pants has claimed he suffered “humiliation” and “physical illness” in a new lawsuit seeking reinstatement and at least $1 million in damages.

In a 52-page lawsuit filed in the D.C. federal court, Roy Pearson claimed that the District and a city judicial commission wrongfully dismissed him for exposing corruption within the Office of Administrative Hearings, the department where he worked.

Pearson’s 10-year appointment as the administrative law judge was reversed last year as news of his $68 million lawsuit over a pair of suit pants gained international attention. The claim was later reduced to $54 million.

He was finally dismissed six months later in a protracted review. Sources told The Examiner that Pearson was canned because he showed a lack of judicial judgment and judicial temperament.

EXAMINER.COM RELATED ARTICLES
Former judge who lost $54M pants suit sues to get job back But Pearson said in court documents that he was protected as a whistle-blower and that the city was using the fact that he was being “vilified in the media” to cut him out of his $100,000 job.

“Confident that the media storm would provide cover for a retaliatory demotion ..., the defendants made little effort to mask their retaliatory motive,” Pearson wrote.

The wrongful actions caused “physical illness, damage to his career and loss of employment, humiliation, damage to his reputation, economic damages and severe emotional distress.”

Pearson is demanding compensatory damages in excess of $75,000 from the District and the five commission members. He also is demanding punitive damages “no less than ten times the amount of compensatory damages from all defendants jointly and severally.”

During the dry-cleaner trial, Pearson broke down on the stand when he tried to describe how he learned that he’d never see his pants again. The judge ruled in favor of the dry cleaners.

Sdallnct 05-06-08 04:47 PM

Funny that he thinks a pair of pants is worth 54 million while losing his job, damage to his career, humiliation, damage to his reputation, econimic damages and emotional distress is only worth a paultry million.

chino77 05-06-08 05:14 PM


Originally Posted by Sdallnct
Funny that he thinks a pair of pants is worth 54 million while losing his job, damage to his career, humiliation, damage to his reputation, econimic damages and emotional distress is only worth a paultry million.

well they were really nice pants!

Nick Danger 05-06-08 05:20 PM

Give him 2% of a pair of pants.

Brian Shannon 05-07-08 07:11 AM


During the dry-cleaner trial, Pearson broke down on the stand when he tried to describe how he learned that he’d never see his pants again. The judge ruled in favor of the dry cleaners.
Why is he not being given a psychiatric evaluation?

CPA-ESQ. 05-07-08 08:44 AM

Not like we didn't see this lawsuit coming down 5th Ave in a cab.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:41 AM.


Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.