| Posted By |
Message |
MrsS2005
Mom of 3
Member since 11/05 13118 total posts
Name:
B
|
Judgment in the $54 million missing pants case
WASHINGTON - A judge ruled Monday in favor of a dry cleaner that was sued for $54 million over a missing pair of pants.
The owners of Custom Cleaners did not violate the city's Consumer Protection Act by failing to live up to Roy L. Pearson's expectations of the "Satisfaction Guaranteed" sign once displayed in the store window, District of Columbia Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff ruled.
Bartnoff ordered Pearson to pay the court costs of defendants Soo Chung, Jin Nam Chung and Ki Y. Chung.
Pearson, an administrative law judge, originally sought $67 million from the Chungs, claiming they lost a pair of suit trousers and later tried to give him a pair that he said was not his. He arrived at the amount by adding up years of alleged law violations and almost $2 million in common law claims.
Pearson later dropped demands for damages related to the pants and focused his claims on signs in the shop, which have since been removed.
Chris Manning, the Chungs' attorney, argued that no reasonable person would interpret the signs to mean an unconditional promise of satisfaction.
The Chungs said the trial had taken an enormous financial and emotional toll on them and exposed them to widespread ridicule.
The two-day trial earlier this month drew a standing-room-only crowd and overshadowed the drunken driving trial of former Mayor Marion Barry.
I'm glad the court ruled in favor of the dry cleaners, but this suit should have never been brought. Pearson completely abused the system and made himself look ridiculous in the process.
|
Posted 6/25/07 1:00 PM  |
| |
|
Long Island Weddings
Long Island's Largest Bridal Resource |
Bxgell2
Perfection
Member since 5/05 16438 total posts
Name:
Beth
|
Re: Judgment in the $54 million missing pants case
What a jackarse. The disciplinary board should slap him for filing a frivolous lawsuit and making a complete and total mockery of the very system he is supposed to be upholding! 
|
| Posted 6/25/07 1:04 PM |
| |
|
cazhley
I ♥ cheesiness.
Member since 1/07 1429 total posts
Name:
Cassie
|
Re: Judgment in the $54 million missing pants case
Glad to hear it. This guy is beyond irrational.
|
| Posted 6/25/07 1:11 PM |
| |
|
alnem
This is gonna be a good year!
Member since 2/06 9562 total posts
Name:
Emily
|
Re: Judgment in the $54 million missing pants case
thank God!!! i felt so bad for those poor people!!!
that guy should be disbarred for pure stupidity!!!
|
| Posted 6/25/07 1:17 PM |
| |
|
nrthshgrl
It goes fast. Pay attention.
Member since 7/05 57538 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Judgment in the $54 million missing pants case
I'm more interested in the competency hearing of the Judge. I wouldn't want him presiding over suits with that mindset.
|
| Posted 6/25/07 1:17 PM |
| |
|
BabyAvocado
Happy New Year
Member since 5/05 17334 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Judgment in the $54 million missing pants case
Posted by Bxgell2
What a jackarse. The disciplinary board should slap him for filing a frivolous lawsuit and making a complete and total mockery of the very system he is supposed to be upholding!
Couldn't have said it better.
|
| Posted 6/25/07 1:27 PM |
| |
|
DaniJude
You're My Home <3
Member since 11/06 14815 total posts
Name:
Danielle
|
Re: Judgment in the $54 million missing pants case
Posted by BabyAvocado
Posted by Bxgell2
What a jackarse. The disciplinary board should slap him for filing a frivolous lawsuit and making a complete and total mockery of the very system he is supposed to be upholding!
Couldn't have said it better.
Same here!
|
| Posted 6/25/07 1:28 PM |
| |
|
Kara
Now Zagat Rated!
Member since 3/07 13217 total posts
Name:
They call me "Tater Salad"
|
Re: Judgment in the $54 million missing pants case
I heard on the news that the plaintiff was also ordered to pay attorney's fees - not just court costs.
|
| Posted 6/25/07 1:32 PM |
| |
|
Kara
Now Zagat Rated!
Member since 3/07 13217 total posts
Name:
They call me "Tater Salad"
|
Re: Judgment in the $54 million missing pants case
Posted by Bxgell2
What a jackarse. The disciplinary board should slap him for filing a frivolous lawsuit and making a complete and total mockery of the very system he is supposed to be upholding!
I agree -- but he's an administrative judge. Not the same thing as a trial judge.
He's still nuts and deserves to disciplined for this. This suit was BEYOND frivolous.
|
| Posted 6/25/07 1:32 PM |
| |
|
MissJones
I need a nap!
Member since 5/05 22136 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Judgment in the $54 million missing pants case
Good. I felt so bad for these people and that a$$hole deserves whats coming to him! Please, of all the things to spend your time and energy on...pants? 
|
| Posted 6/25/07 4:55 PM |
| |
|
SweetestOfPeas
J'taime Paris!
Member since 3/06 32345 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Judgment in the $54 million missing pants case
what a waste of the legal systems time! UGH! that Judge who sued should be FIRED!
|
| Posted 6/25/07 4:56 PM |
| |
|
