Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > General Discussions > Other Talk
Reload this Page >

Judge sues cleaner for $65M over pants (update: Judge loses job)

Other Talk "Otterville"

Judge sues cleaner for $65M over pants (update: Judge loses job)

Old 05-03-07, 07:58 PM
  #51  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
tommyp007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Kingsport, TN
Posts: 5,842
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Groucho
This thread came up on a routine search for "pants overflowing with whitey". It does not deliver.
5/5
Old 05-04-07, 01:38 AM
  #52  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 7,781
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by McHawkson
That Judge is fucking asshole... It's ONLY pants, it can easily replaced.
especially with the $12000 that was offered.

hes a greedy asshole who i hope does not get one cent. and i hope he loses his job. let this ruin the rest of HIS life.
Old 05-04-07, 08:56 AM
  #53  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 9,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Look, I'm not defending this guy, but to say he should lose his license is ridiculous. It would be a blatant denial of equal protection and due process. What is the comparable penalty for anyone who is not a lawyer who brings a frivolous lawsuit? There is none. Just because someone is an ass, that is not a reason to lose your license. If it were, most of the top law firms wouldn't have any lawyers in them.
There are several ABA Model Rules right on point with this. The D.C. bar has adopted at least one that is right on point:
http://www.dcbar.org/for%5Flawyers/e.../rule03_01.cfm
3.1
A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous, which includes a good faith argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law....
In the comments section it states:
The action is frivolous if the lawyer is unable either to make a good-faith argument on the merits of the action taken or to support the action taken by a good-faith argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law.
I would argue that the damages for "satisfaction guaranteed" is pretty baseless and not grounded in much law. The other claims for damages are pretty wild.

Also, there is a Code of Judicial Conduct, which the guy has to abide by, and he probably isn't doing that either.

Last edited by chanster; 05-04-07 at 11:00 AM.
Old 05-04-07, 09:38 AM
  #54  
Mod Emeritus
 
benedict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Outside of the U.S.A.
Posts: 10,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
$12K seems more than generous.

I don't know if you guys have anything similar but, in England & Wales, if an eventual settlement is less than what was offered at an earlier date, the "winner" is liable for all of the legal expenses incurred by both sides from the time of that earlier higher offer.

It is like officialdom saying, you should have taken the lump sum and not wasted everyone's time.
Old 05-04-07, 10:02 AM
  #55  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MN
Posts: 23,935
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Groucho
This thread came up on a routine search for "pants overflowing with whitey". It does not deliver.
Old 05-04-07, 12:36 PM
  #56  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Rochester, NY USA
Posts: 4,956
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
12 was not offered to the judge, that what he first offered they pay him.
Old 05-04-07, 12:38 PM
  #57  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Dr. Henry Jones, Jr.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: My Car
Posts: 6,750
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by mmconhea
12 was not offered to the judge, that what he first offered they pay him.
Sounds like it was offered to him..

Manning said the cleaners made three settlement offers to Pearson. First they offered $3,000, then $4,600, then $12,000.
Old 05-04-07, 12:44 PM
  #58  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: USA
Posts: 12,317
Received 7 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by benedict
I don't know if you guys have anything similar but, in England & Wales, if an eventual settlement is less than what was offered at an earlier date, the "winner" is liable for all of the legal expenses incurred by both sides from the time of that earlier higher offer.

It is like officialdom saying, you should have taken the lump sum and not wasted everyone's time.
No but we should have.
Old 05-04-07, 02:10 PM
  #59  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Hail to the Redskins!
Posts: 25,024
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes on 14 Posts
Originally Posted by benedict
I don't know if you guys have anything similar but, in England & Wales, if an eventual settlement is less than what was offered at an earlier date, the "winner" is liable for all of the legal expenses incurred by both sides from the time of that earlier higher offer.
I love Brian, but he's wrong. You just described an "Offer of Judgment" FRCP 68 and adopted by most, if not all, states, in some similar or identical fashion.

I don't know English statutory law, but here in the US "legal expense" are costs, which are not fees. Generally speaking, fees are only recoverable where authorized by contract or statute. I would be surprised if it in the UK attorney's fees were covered under the umbrella term "legal expenses".
Old 05-04-07, 03:27 PM
  #60  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 589
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Another idiotic case that shouldn't even see the light of day. Valid cases get postponed and left out due to these idiotic cases. It's an embarrassment.
Old 05-04-07, 04:08 PM
  #61  
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Illustrious State of Fugue
Posts: 6,257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
Look, I'm not defending this guy, but to say he should lose his license is ridiculous. It would be a blatant denial of equal protection and due process. What is the comparable penalty for anyone who is not a lawyer who brings a frivolous lawsuit? There is none. Just because someone is an ass, that is not a reason to lose your license. If it were, most of the top law firms wouldn't have any lawyers in them.
I think in this case he should definitely be disbarred. This is much more than frivolity. The money is not the issue and this guy is making what, in most people of low character, would be a hissy fit into an attempt to literally destroy the lives of an entire family. And...he is using his "impartial" position to do it. I wouldn't want this guy sitting on any bench in any court in any country. I feel that giving him license to practice law is a mistake after he's shown his true nature.

If you give a kid some crayons and he/she starts coloring all over the walls, wouldn't you take the crayons away?
Now what if the crayons were the means to destroy anyone you felt like?

Last edited by Kudama; 05-04-07 at 04:11 PM.
Old 05-04-07, 04:37 PM
  #62  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Colorado
Posts: 5,614
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Kudama
Now what if the crayons were the means to destroy anyone you felt like?
Then I would carry at least one of the crayons with me at all times.
Old 05-04-07, 04:38 PM
  #63  
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Illustrious State of Fugue
Posts: 6,257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
...
Old 05-04-07, 04:57 PM
  #64  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Hail to the Redskins!
Posts: 25,024
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes on 14 Posts
Originally Posted by Kudama
I think in this case he should definitely be disbarred. This is much more than frivolity. The money is not the issue and this guy is making what, in most people of low character, would be a hissy fit into an attempt to literally destroy the lives of an entire family. And...he is using his "impartial" position to do it.
WTF? How on earth is he using his "impartial" position to bring a lawsuit? It's not like he's suing them as a judge or bringing the case in his own courtroom. It's suing as a private party litigant, which is his right, as it is yours to do.

It is very troubling to me how quick people are to throw away one of the most important rights in the Constitution (due process) just because a person is of low character. If the Constitution does not protect the weakest among us, the strongest surely have no chance.
Old 05-04-07, 05:01 PM
  #65  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: NYC
Posts: 17,016
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
WTF? How on earth is he using his "impartial" position to bring a lawsuit? It's not like he's suing them as a judge or bringing the case in his own courtroom. It's suing as a private party litigant, which is his right, as it is yours to do.

It is very troubling to me how quick people are to throw away one of the most important rights in the Constitution (due process) just because a person is of low character. If the Constitution does not protect the weakest among us, the strongest surely have no chance.
You're entitled to your opinion. I don't think he's acting within the ethical bounds of his profession. He's essentially trying to put this family out of business through expensive legal action. Over a pair of pants.
Old 05-04-07, 05:19 PM
  #66  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Hail to the Redskins!
Posts: 25,024
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes on 14 Posts
Originally Posted by Breakfast with Girls
You're entitled to your opinion. I don't think he's acting within the ethical bounds of his profession. He's essentially trying to put this family out of business through expensive legal action. Over a pair of pants.
To be sure, the guy is a total asshole. But is he not a private citizen when not presiding over his court or acting in an official capacity? If so, why should he be subject to penalties for actions that are not associated with his official duties? In my mind, that is not justice applied equally.
Old 05-04-07, 05:26 PM
  #67  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 4,472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
To be sure, the guy is a total asshole. But is he not a private citizen when not presiding over his court or acting in an official capacity? If so, why should he be subject to penalties for actions that are not associated with his official duties? In my mind, that is not justice applied equally.
Isn't he an officer of the court? If so, he should be held to a standard of principals when it concerns the judiciary (and filing such a frivilous lawsuit would certainly go against the code of ethics, in my mind).
Old 05-04-07, 05:50 PM
  #68  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Hail to the Redskins!
Posts: 25,024
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes on 14 Posts
Originally Posted by BJacks
Isn't he an officer of the court? If so, he should be held to a standard of principals when it concerns the judiciary (and filing such a frivilous lawsuit would certainly go against the code of ethics, in my mind).
It's the same argument. He is not acting in that capacity when prosecuting a lawsuit filed a private citizen.
Old 05-04-07, 05:59 PM
  #69  
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Illustrious State of Fugue
Posts: 6,257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
It's the same argument. He is not acting in that capacity when prosecuting a lawsuit filed a private citizen.
That is a fact, but I think this "trying to destroy someone for a frivolous reason" sheds light on his character.
A felon who has paid their debt to society wouldn't be considered for the position because of character issues. I think this guy has made it pretty clear that he is not mentally balanced. His reaction is so drastically out of proportion to what happened it's insane. Would you want someone with a history of mental illness sitting as a judge?
Old 05-04-07, 06:13 PM
  #70  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: NYC
Posts: 17,016
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
To be sure, the guy is a total asshole. But is he not a private citizen when not presiding over his court or acting in an official capacity? If so, why should he be subject to penalties for actions that are not associated with his official duties? In my mind, that is not justice applied equally.
He's trying to ruin them financially, destroy their livelihood. It's not that far removed from a medical doctor refusing to help his neighbor who's having a heart attack because his neighbor doesn't mow his lawn often enough.
Old 05-04-07, 08:14 PM
  #71  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 589
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Kudama
That is a fact, but I think this "trying to destroy someone for a frivolous reason" sheds light on his character.
A felon who has paid their debt to society wouldn't be considered for the position because of character issues. I think this guy has made it pretty clear that he is not mentally balanced. His reaction is so drastically out of proportion to what happened it's insane. Would you want someone with a history of mental illness sitting as a judge?
I agree 100%. There's some weido philosophy going around in this country by a certain faction that lawyers, educators and judges can't be crazy too.

I once had a math teacher who would come in to class, push her desk against the wall, and talk to herself constantly in frenetic irrational chatter. She might have passed a state test, but the woman was missing more bricks than the Cascade Brick Inn -- after it was hit by that midwestern tornado.

-----

Also, a judge will have more power than the average person no matter if they're on their "private citizen day" or not. And more money to bring about frivolous lawsuits that shouldn't see the light of day.

He's literally putting this family through an unneeded hell just to be an "asshole." Expletive usage, but appropriate. Hopefully he takes up golf and knocks himself in the head with the club -- fifty times over.

Last edited by AllHallowsEve; 05-04-07 at 08:18 PM.
Old 05-04-07, 08:27 PM
  #72  
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Illustrious State of Fugue
Posts: 6,257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
At least a math teacher can only give you a bad grade, not make or break a case that changes or destroys peoples' lives.

BTW - What grade did you get in that class and did she come on to you? And was she cute?

Last edited by Kudama; 05-04-07 at 08:30 PM.
Old 05-04-07, 09:53 PM
  #73  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 53,584
Received 131 Likes on 95 Posts
Originally Posted by CPA-ESQ.
I just saw the clip on CNN and I'm interested in seeing if this guy gets removed from the bench - I didn't know he was a minority.
Yep. And the official government website has taken down almost all references to the dumbass.

For a judge who is supposed to determine equality of the law, this fucker is obviously not competent to be a judge. He can go back to flipping burgers.
Old 05-04-07, 10:08 PM
  #74  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
antennaball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The 7-8-Triple6, Texas
Posts: 3,621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
It's the same argument. He is not acting in that capacity when prosecuting a lawsuit filed a private citizen.
It's the same principal as cops. If I went out on my day off and drove around drunk, there's no why I can use the excuse that I was a private citizen at the time and get to keep my job. Why? Because as soon as I did that, I would lose ALL credibility in my job. I guarantee you the very next time I went to court on a DWI that I arrested, the first thing out of the defense's mouth would be "The officer himself has a history of DWI" and I would be discredited from the get-go.

The same applies to a judge or any other officer of the court. What you do on your "private time" can (and should) directly effect the performance of your job.
Old 05-04-07, 10:26 PM
  #75  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 53,584
Received 131 Likes on 95 Posts
Especially when you're an employee of a public agency.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

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