Evil judge sues for $54 million over "lost" pants

[Sir Tim Drake]

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=3269485&page=1

Roy Pearson, a judge in Washington D.C., has sued a Korean-owned laundry for $54 million (reduced from $67 million) for allegedly losing a pair of his pants, and for putting out allegedly false signs that said "Satisfaction Guaranteed" and "Same Day Service."

As it turns out, the pants weren't even lost; Pearson's claim is that the pants returned by the laundry were not his. Also, the defendants are immigrants who apparently don't speak English well. Their lawyer has accused Pearson of abusing his legal knowledge to take advantage of them.

Not only is this man a disgrace to the legal profession, but lawsuits like this tend to reduce the public's confidence in the legal system. I hope his case is dismissed and I hope he gets a stiff fine for filing a frivolous suit (no pun intended).

What do you all think of this sordid affair?

[Alex L]

I hope this never makes it to court.

A judge (of all people) is now filing a frivolous lawsuit. Words fail me...

[Matt_Stevens]

It made it to court. It's so completely wrong in every way possible. Truly horrid.

[Nick Soapdish]

I heard about this a long time ago and I'm sorry to hear that it hasn't died yet.

I hope that he's removed from his seat and then disbarred.

I'm serious. I've seen some contemptible lawsuits, but this one takes the cake. I mean, suing them for the expense to go to a different dry cleaner. Why not just sue a different dry cleaner for not being close enough to where you live while you're at it? (Hmm. I think I have an idea.)

[Wesley Dodds]

Maybe he works for the CIA and they were laser pants?

You know, like that episode of Get Smart with the laser blazer.

[Nikita]

They were just talking about this on the radio today. Judge = lame.

[Kevin M.]

The American legal system, you got to love it. :rolleyes:

[Alan Lynch]

I'm serious. I've seen some contemptible lawsuits, but this one takes the cake. I mean, suing them for the expense to go to a different dry cleaner. Why not just sue a different dry cleaner for not being close enough to where you live while you're at it? (Hmm. I think I have an idea.)
Or - perish the thought - wash them himself? What a tool.

A couple of us were talking about this last night, wondering what had happened since the story first broke. It's offensive to think that this is going to take up court time.

[Spike-X]

Not only is this man a disgrace to the legal profession...

Hell, he's a disgrace to humanity.

[Wesley Dodds]

Of course, since he's a judge, he could just not wear any pants and nobody would ever know.

[Valmore]

$54 million for a pair of pants? Where the hell does he shop? Bill Gates' closet or something?

[Tages]

Of course, since he's a judge, he could just not wear any pants and nobody would ever know.

...what is going on in Australia?

[cactusmaac]

What is it with judges and pants?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6740381.stm


Woman 'shocked by flashing judge'

A woman has told a court of her "embarrassment" when one of England's most senior judges exposed himself to her on a rush-hour train.

[Wesley Dodds]

What is it with judges and pants?

They don't wear any?

[Motormouse]

What a pathetic little man. The sad part of this is that due to the user-friendly aspects of the U.S. legal system, even if this gets thrown out of court, the laundry will still have to pay it's own fee's which could well bankrupt the business. I prefer our system here in the U.K. Loser pays everyones fee's, and the self rightious child in me would like this judge (who really ought to have more respect for the law) to lose...well, everything but the pants in question!:rolleyes:

[Xero Kaiser]

This fool was crying in the courtroom over his pants. CRYING.

I hope lightning strikes this guy in the face

[Wesley Dodds]

The ABC News Law & Justice Unit has calculated that for the original $67 million Pearson sought, he could buy 84,115 new pairs of pants at the $800 value he placed on the missing trousers in court documents. If you stacked those pants up, they would be taller than eight Mount Everests. If you laid them side by side, they would stretch for 48 miles.

That's a lot of pants.

[Sir Tim Drake]

What a pathetic little man. The sad part of this is that due to the user-friendly aspects of the U.S. legal system, even if this gets thrown out of court, the laundry will still have to pay it's own fee's which could well bankrupt the business. I prefer our system here in the U.K. Loser pays everyones fee's, and the self rightious child in me would like this judge (who really ought to have more respect for the law) to lose...well, everything but the pants in question!:rolleyes:

I don't know much about the law, but I agree, "loser pays" does seem like a more reasonable system.

But even in the American system, isn't the judge allowed to award court costs to the party that wins?

[OhMyGato]

i read about this a while ago. what an asshole.

[TheLazy]

I saw this on fox about a month ago. One of the rare times I agreed with Bill O'Rielly. This guy should loose his liscence.

:)

[Erebus]

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=3269485&page=1

Roy Pearson, a judge in Washington D.C., has sued a Korean-owned laundry for $54 million (reduced from $67 million) for allegedly losing a pair of his pants, and for putting out allegedly false signs that said "Satisfaction Guaranteed" and "Same Day Service."

As it turns out, the pants weren't even lost; Pearson's claim is that the pants returned by the laundry were not his. Also, the defendants are immigrants who apparently don't speak English well. Their lawyer has accused Pearson of abusing his legal knowledge to take advantage of them.

Not only is this man a disgrace to the legal profession, but lawsuits like this tend to reduce the public's confidence in the legal system. I hope his case is dismissed and I hope he gets a stiff fine for filing a frivolous suit (no pun intended).

What do you all think of this sordid affair?

Damn, this sucks. My parents are also Korean immigrants who own a dry-cleaner. I was talking to them today, and they think it might be bad for business. I told them not to worry though, because this is so retarded, no one's going to care.

[Erebus]

And one of the worst parts is, with all the media attention going to it, the case will probably go a lot slower then it has to.

[Nick Soapdish]

I don't know much about the law, but I agree, "loser pays" does seem like a more reasonable system.

But even in the American system, isn't the judge allowed to award court costs to the party that wins?

They could launch a counter-suit on the basis that it's a frivolous lawsuit to recover court costs and for damage to their reputation, et al. But I suspect that by the time that they get through with this, they will never want to see a courtroom or lawyer ever again.

[Valmore]

The other day Lex and Terry were yacking about this on the radio. They said that every business in the D.C. area should hang his picture up, know his name, and refuse him service. Dry cleaners, cafes, whatever retail or service industry should just totally deny him service.

Frankly, I tend to agree.

[Sean Walsh]

They were just talking about this on the radio today. Judge = lame.

You, fellow CBR poster, have insulted the word "lame" by associating this jackass bastard with it, and I shall sue you for 954 gabillion dollars for that. ;) :p

[Spike-X]

The other day Lex and Terry were yacking about this on the radio. They said that every business in the D.C. area should hang his picture up, know his name, and refuse him service. Dry cleaners, cafes, whatever retail or service industry should just totally deny him service.

Frankly, I tend to agree.

Then he can sue all of them!

[Nick Soapdish]

The other day Lex and Terry were yacking about this on the radio. They said that every business in the D.C. area should hang his picture up, know his name, and refuse him service. Dry cleaners, cafes, whatever retail or service industry should just totally deny him service.

Frankly, I tend to agree.

I love that idea. It's simple risk analysis for those businesses. :)

If they serve him, they run the risk of not giving him enough creams for his coffee and having him sue them because he has to drive miles out of his way to an acceptable alternative or something.

[Valmore]

You, fellow CBR poster, have insulted the word "lame" by associating this jackass bastard with it, and I shall sue you for 954 gabillion dollars for that. ;) :p

I'm afraid that, for circumstances too complicated to type, you'll have to reduce the damages asked for to 924 gabillion dollars.

[Alex L]

I don't know much about the law, but I agree, "loser pays" does seem like a more reasonable system.

But even in the American system, isn't the judge allowed to award court costs to the party that wins?

The only downside is that it would make it harder for the 'little guy' to be able to sue, since he knows that if he loses, not only does he lose -- but he must pay for that high-priced team of lawyers employed by a larger organization.

[Sir Tim Drake]

The only downside is that it would make it harder for the 'little guy' to be able to sue, since he knows that if he loses, not only does he lose -- but he must pay for that high-priced team of lawyers employed by a larger organization.

Yeah, that seems to be the biggest argument against the loser-pays system.

Still, I don't see any reason why the judge shouldn't be able to award attorneys' fees to the defendant, if the plaintiff's lawsuit is frivolous or abusive. According to Wikipedia, there are some statutes that allow judges to do this.

[Sean Whitmore]

A judge (of all people) is now filing a frivolous lawsuit. Words fail me...

I don't see why it's surprising. Judges have been letting frivolous lawsuits go through for years, it was only a matter of time before one of them started one themselves.


SEAN

[Winslow]

It's pretty shocking this went though and is actually being tried.

But the case is not "characteristic" of the American civil justice system (as one that works i the American civil justice system). Like one of the quotes in the article, it's so bizarre it's like a parody.

The reason people think the American civil justice system is screwed up is because only the bizarre cases tend to be highlighted by the media . . . or judgments are only partially reported.

[Sean Walsh]

I don't see why it's surprising. Judges have been letting frivolous lawsuits go through for years, it was only a matter of time before one of them started one themselves.

I'm REALLY hoping that this one case is the one that drives politicians over the edge and propose serious tort reforms.

That or mass assassinations would please me at this point.

[Winslow]

I'm REALLY hoping that this one case is the one that drives politicians over the edge and propose serious tort reforms.

That or mass assassinations would please me at this point.

Tort reform would most likely just pad insurance companies pockets more than actually improve anything.

I would favor more serious penalties against frivolous lawsuits and insurance fraud.

[Iangould]

So doing a little background reading on this a few points stand out:

While this guy's job title is "administrative judge", his job involves arbitrating public complaints against government agencies. That sounds more like an Ombudsman than a typical judge.

His salary is "only" $100,000 a year, that's pretty modest for a judge.

I note too that unlike most judges, his job is for a fixed term. It's being suggested that regardless of how the suit is resolved he won't be reappointed to his job.

Apparently he lodged a lawsuit against his ex-wife several years ago which was dismissed with costs awarded against him for malicious prosecution.

He was also dismissed from his previous job as a legal aid lawyer over a dispute with his boss who who described him as brilliant but obsessive.

So he's a flake with a history of frivolous lawsuits who's probably going ot end up losing the lawsuit and his job.

[Karl J Barnes]

Or maybe the courts can get the judge to settle for a bag of Double Stuff Oreos and a carton of ice cold milk??

[Winslow]

Or maybe the courts can get the judge to settle for a bag of Double Stuff Oreos and a carton of ice cold milk??

I'm pretty sure that's what he's hoping for.

It's standard practice to inflate the claim amount to leave room for negotiation.

[Calybos]

Okay, just to clarify...

Are people here saying that the judge has no case? Or just that he's asking for way too much money?

[Sir Tim Drake]

Okay, just to clarify...

Are people here saying that the judge has no case? Or just that he's asking for way too much money?

Both.

.....

[Valmore]

Okay, just to clarify...

Are people here saying that the judge has no case? Or just that he's asking for way too much money?

Does he have a case?

Sure. For small-claims court. Or "The People's Court."

For millions upon millions of dollars?

Hell no.

[Alex]

Does he have a case?

Sure. For small-claims court. Or "The People's Court."

For millions upon millions of dollars?

Hell no.

Just because you don't feel a connection to your pants doesn't mean he doesn't.
Maybe he killed his mom wearing those pants.

[Super Hero Guy]

Does this man seriously think those two will ever be able to pay even 1% of that even if they saved up for the rest of their lives?

If I weren't sane, I think I'd sue him for disgusting me beyond belief, for 424 billion dollars.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Damn this is something I would try. Sueing someone for $54 million for losing my pants is so awesome. Plus its an illegal immigrant and you know that they can't speak english well so you can have the edge in a court battle !

I plan to go take my pants to a dry cleaner and hope they screw it up. Then I can haul their asses into court for way up there.

[Toku King]

Oh. My. GOD. Un-fucking-believable. That is the most unbelievably terrible thing I have ever heard in the courtroom since the sentence of the pedophile to 16 days. No wait, this is a million times worse.
That monster! How the hell can people let this shit happen? He's ruining the lives of innocent people just because there was a mistake! Unless there was $54 million in one of those pockets, that's one of the most evil things humanly possible.

[Toku King]

Damn this is something I would try. Sueing someone for $54 million for losing my pants is so awesome. Plus its an illegal immigrant and you know that they can't speak english well so you can have the edge in a court battle !

I plan to go take my pants to a dry cleaner and hope they screw it up. Then I can haul their asses into court for way up there.

I know it's supposed to be funny, but it's heartbreaking that people try to make glee out of something so horrid.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

I know it's supposed to be funny, but it's heartbreaking that people try to make glee out of something so horrid.

What are the odds a court will actually allow this to continue ? I always look for glee in the most depressing news. Like an astroid is due to hit Earth in 2029 last I heard.....I plan on roasting marshmellows that day ! :p

[Toku King]

What are the odds a court will actually allow this to continue ? I always look for glee in the most depressing news. Like an astroid is due to hit Earth in 2029 last I heard.....I plan on roasting marshmellows that day ! :p

Actually, the world's supposed to end in 2012.
I'll bring the hotdogs then.
Listen, I'm not insulting you, it's just that that sounded crueler than intentional.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Actually, the world's supposed to end in 2012.
I'll bring the hotdogs then.
Listen, I'm not insulting you, it's just that that sounded crueler than intentional.

I'm a very dark humored guy. I mean everyones discussing the outrage over this guy sueing these poor people back to the new Stone Age of Bedrock. Me I'm thinking....damn what a great GET RICH quick scheme. I have to hand it to the jerk , thats balls to sue someone for $54 million and its over a pair of jeans.

[Super Hero Guy]

I cannot get over this. I read this article on Saturday and its still in my mind today. How can any human being be so petty, selfish, disgusting, cold-hearted, pig-headed, stubborn, malicious, greedy, ridiculous, over-the-top, dirty, vile, repulsive and evil?!?! How the hell could a man who became a judge have the nerve to sue anyone for 54 million dollars over a pair of pants?!?! How can he pretend to get emotional during court because of it?!?! IF THIS MAN ACTUALLY CRIED BECAUSE OF HIS PANTS HE SHOULD GO TO A MENTAL HOSPITAL!!!! And if he was pretending, HE SHOULD BE PUT IN PRISON FOR PERJORY!!!! This man is an embarasment to the human race. His actions do nothing but torture an innocent family who are trying to make a living. They lost the pants. Fine. Mistakes happen. They offered him twice what the pants cost. The man did not accept it. They offered him 4 times the cost. He did not accept it. They offered him TWELVE times the cost. AND THE MAN INSTEAD ASKED FOR 50 000 TIMES THE COST!!!! Moron, signs saying "Satisfaction Guaranteed" do not mean that the employees are superhumans who never make mistakes. It means they will try their best to help you. They offered you a fair amount, and even an unfairly large amount, but this petty bastard was not happy until he made his point and tried to destroy this family by stealing every cent they have. Even if they win the case (and I sincerely doubt they won't) they'll be out thousands and thousands of dollars, for having done nothing. They even found the damn pants a few days later. This greedy bastard destroys everything the legal system stands for.

I wish I were him...

[Sean Walsh]

Tort reform would most likely just pad insurance companies pockets more than actually improve anything.

I would favor more serious penalties against frivolous lawsuits and insurance fraud.

If said penalties consisted of a homeless person beating them to death with a baseball bat, then I accept your position and heartily endorse it.

[Sir Tim Drake]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/6/67_MILLION_PANTS?SITE=TNCHA&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2007-06-25-10-55-52

The judge ruled in favor of the defendants, and ordered Pearson to pay the Chungs' court costs. There is a pending motion to make him pay the defendants' attorneys' fees as well.

This is excellent news. But I hope Pearson does have to pay the attorneys' fees. The court should make an example of him, in order to further deter other people from attempting similar stunts.

[fly on the wall]

I'm a very dark humored guy. I mean everyones discussing the outrage over this guy sueing these poor people back to the new Stone Age of Bedrock. Me I'm thinking....damn what a great GET RICH quick scheme. I have to hand it to the jerk , thats balls to sue someone for $54 million and its over a pair of jeans.


So...

He's like your role model.

shiver

[fly on the wall]

So...

He's like your role model.

shiver

In China they'd probably execute the guy, but of course the 'suit' would never have gotten to court.

The story has a happy ending in that (surprise) he didn't get his 54 million, but really it doesn't have a happy ending. The real tragedy is that the pantless one got his day in court.

It's like roaches, if you see one you've probably got hundreds. We see this frivolous lawsuit getting it's day in court it probably means hundreds of other frivolous lawsuits are making their way into court. Our legal system is ailing.

[Sean Walsh]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/6/67_MILLION_PANTS?SITE=TNCHA&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2007-06-25-10-55-52

The judge ruled in favor of the defendants, and ordered Pearson to pay the Chungs' court costs. There is a pending motion to make him pay the defendants' attorneys' fees as well.

This is excellent news. But I hope Pearson does have to pay the attorneys' fees. The court should make an example of him, in order to further deter other people from attempting similar stunts.

Finally, some faith in America is restored. I really did believe the court might side with the judge, for some sick sad reason.

Only sad thing about this ruling is that the judge did not decree that the plaintiff should pay all fees for everyone in the courtroom, give all his remaining money to charity, and then open his wrists and jump off a roof onto a car rigged with explosives.

But y'can't have 'em all, I guess.......so this ruling works too. :p

[Sean Walsh]

We see this frivolous lawsuit getting it's day in court it probably means hundreds of other frivolous lawsuits are making their way into court. Our legal system is ailing.

Talk about Mr. Optimism.........

Merely hundreds of others? HA! :p

[fly on the wall]

Talk about Mr. Optimism.........

Merely hundreds of others? HA! :p

I wanted to keep the one-roach-means-one-hundred thing going.

I guess I didn't know when to ditch the analogy.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

So...

He's like your role model.

shiver

He's like the EVIL version of me. You know that mirror world where Kirk and Spock met their evil selves ? He would be on Mirror Earth.. ;)

[Cam63]

*Applauds legal system*

Sometimes it works.

Now, how about they counter sue the bastard for all costs and stress ?

[Dan Apodaca]

Fuckin' pants.

[founder81]

Fuckin' pants.

I say down with pants!

[Subotai]

*Applauds legal system*

Sometimes it works.

If it really worked, I don't think it would've gotten this far.

[Sean Walsh]

I'm hearing that they might Nifong this guy - that is, now that the case is over, certain parties go after him to punish him even further for abusing the system like this.


(I'd like to say I think I'm the first person who has used Nifong as a verb. So credit me in all usages after this or I will sue you and your pants for 987 billion dollars. Thank you.)

[Winslow]

If it really worked, I don't think it would've gotten this far.

Most frivolous law suits don't. They get shot down in Summary Judgment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) if you have a half decent attorney.

I have no idea why this one made it to court.

[Michael P]

Most frivolous law suits don't. They get shot down in Summary Judgment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) if you have a half decent attorney.

I have no idea why this one made it to court.

Probably because this guy knew a whole bunch of ways to end run around summary judgment. Or somethin'.

[Winslow]

Probably because this guy knew a whole bunch of ways to end run around summary judgment. Or somethin'.

Or worse, he's connected politically.

[Matt Algren]

The good news (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/offbeat/2007/06/pearson_v_custom_cleaners_pres.html) is that it appears that the Chungs aren't planning to move back to Korea.

The not-yet-bad news (http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/06/26/should-judge-pearson-lose-his-gavel/) is that the judge hasn't decided if Mr. Pearson must pay their legal bills. That'll be decided later this week.

[founder81]

It would be easy for this guy to raise money.

For one single lousy dollar you can punch this guy in the face.

All proceeds go to charity.

[Iangould]

Most frivolous law suits don't. They get shot down in Summary Judgment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) if you have a half decent attorney.

I have no idea why this one made it to court.

1. DC's court system may be structured differently to the states.

2. As I noted earlier this guy is a flake. He apparently once pursued a relatively minor legal aid case all the way to the Supreme Court despite losing the case at every lower level. It took him thirteen years. He undoubtedly fought very hrd to prevent the summary judgment.

As to whether there will be more sanctions against him, his judicial appointment is for a ten year term and will be up for renewal soon. So it may not be necessary to actually remove him from office. This is the second time (at least) he's launched a meritless lawsuit, I don't know whether that's a valid basis for disbarment.

[Nick Soapdish]

1. DC's court system may be structured differently to the states.

2. As I noted earlier this guy is a flake. He apparently once pursued a relatively minor legal aid case all the way to the Supreme Court despite losing the case at every lower level. It took him thirteen years. He undoubtedly fought very hrd to prevent the summary judgment.

As to whether there will be more sanctions against him, his judicial appointment is for a ten year term and will be up for renewal soon. So it may not be necessary to actually remove him from office. This is the second time (at least) he's launched a meritless lawsuit, I don't know whether that's a valid basis for disbarment.

So he's got some skill. Now if only he would use his powers for good instead of evil.

[Toku King]

I'm incredibly happy that they didn't let it get past.
Now, all we need to do is plop the waste of space judge into the ocean with sharks.

[Sir Tim Drake]

I'm incredibly happy that they didn't let it get past.
Now, all we need to do is plop the waste of space judge into the ocean with sharks.

That wouldn't work -- a judge is also a lawyer, and like the joke says, sharks don't eat lawyers, because of professional courtesy.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

I say down with pants!

YEAH !! I hear ya. Up with SHORTS !!

[Jared_Humpherys]

YEAH !! I hear ya. Up with SHORTS !!

I believe the joke is "Up with skirts!"

Anywho, glad to see the lawsuit dismissed. Now I hope he pays for the legal costs.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

I believe the joke is "Up with skirts!"

Anywho, glad to see the lawsuit dismissed. Now I hope he pays for the legal costs.

I believe he'll counter sue for malicious prosecution. :p

[Toku King]

Just to make him mad, I want to set fire to the guy's pants.

[Subotai]

Just to make him mad, I want to set fire to the guy's pants.

As long as he's wearing them at the time.

[Cam63]

If it really worked, I don't think it would've gotten this far.

I couldn't agree more.

...but he be a juuuuudge !

[rick]

Anyone know when the judge is going to decide on if this guy has to pay the dry cleaners legal bills or not?

[Cam63]

I saw on the news an hour ago he has to pay all costs to the drycleaners.

So, yeah... He's gunna be a little poorer.

[fly on the wall]

Anyone know when the judge is going to decide on if this guy has to pay the dry cleaners legal bills or not?

All I've heard so far is that he has to pay "court costs". I don't think that includes legal bills. I've heard that fighting this lawsuit has wiped out the savings of the dry cleaners.

[Matt Algren]

I saw on the news an hour ago he has to pay all costs to the drycleaners.

So, yeah... He's gunna be a little poorer.
I'm still seeing that he (so far) just has to pay court costs, not attorney costs. Right now, he's out about $1,000. Judge Bartnoff is supposed to decide on the attorney costs soon.

[Puma]

this guy is a total douche bag

Judge Continues to Press Pants Suit

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

(07-11) 14:39 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) --

A customer who lost a $54 million lawsuit against a dry cleaner over a missing pair of pants on Wednesday asked a judge to reconsider the verdict.

Roy L. Pearson, a local administrative law judge, argued that District of Columbia Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff failed to address his legal claims when she ruled that the business owners did not violate the city's consumer protection law by failing to live up to his expectations of a "Satisfaction Guaranteed" sign once displayed in the store.

"The court effectively substituted a guarantee of satisfaction with 'reasonable' limits and preconditions for the unconditional and unambigious guarantee of satisfaction the defendant-merchant chose to advertise for seven years," Pearson wrote. "That was a fundamental legal error."

The suit originally asked for $67 million.

The motion comes less than a week after the South Korean immigrant owners of Custom Cleaners asked the judge to order Pearson to cover $83,000 in legal fees.

"(The) Plaintiff's motives have been clear — quite simply, to harass Defendants and to attempt to utterly destroy their lives," attorney Christopher Manning wrote.

The case, which drew international attention, began in 2005 when Pearson became an administrative law judge and brought several suits for alterations to Custom Cleaners.

A pair of pants from one suit was missing when he requested it two days later. A week later, the Chungs said the pants had been found, but Pearson denied that they were his and decided to sue.

Pearson's suit was based on a strict interpretation of the city's consumer protection law. It also included damages for inconvenience, mental anguish and attorney's fees for representing himself.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/07/11/national/a134430D94.DTL
© 2007 Hearst Communications Inc. | Privacy Policy | Feedback | RSS Feeds | FAQ | Site Index | Contact

[Sir Tim Drake]

What an asshole. Maybe he figures that he can't possibly do any more damage to his own reputation, or make himself even more of a public laughingstock, so he might as well try to get some money.

[Boldido]

There is little doubt in my mind that the judge will deny this motion for rehearing. My concern is an appeal. Assuming the court orders him to pay the defendant's legal fees I have a question. Do any of the civil whizzes here know whether the court can order him to post a bond to cover the defense fees in order to prosecute an appeal?

[Solaris]

Don't you just wish that there was a law that, under the impartial determination by three uninvolved judges, if a person continues to press a frivolous law suit, they can also be charged for the time the court spends on the case (figure some penalty fee) rather than dealing with actual cases?

Might cut down quite a bit on the "Let's sue the pants off 'em!" mentality, when it's a case like this. :D

[Slam_Bradley]

There is little doubt in my mind that the judge will deny this motion for rehearing. My concern is an appeal. Assuming the court orders him to pay the defendant's legal fees I have a question. Do any of the civil whizzes here know whether the court can order him to post a bond to cover the defense fees in order to prosecute an appeal?


In most states I'm aware of the answer is yes. You frequently have to post a bond to cover the cost of the judgment and fees in order to get your appeal heard.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Don't you just wish that there was a law that, under the impartial determination by three uninvolved judges, if a person continues to press a frivolous law suit, they can also be charged for the time the court spends on the case (figure some penalty fee) rather than dealing with actual cases?

Might cut down quite a bit on the "Let's sue the pants off 'em!" mentality, when it's a case like this. :D

I wish there was a law where you as a citizen who has to handle paying this madness as a taxpayer can walk up and kick the people who file frivolous lawsuits straight in the ass. Hard as you possibly can for being an idiot.

[Solaris]

I wish there was a law where you as a citizen who has to handle paying this madness as a taxpayer can walk up and kick the people who file frivolous lawsuits straight in the ass. Hard as you possibly can for being an idiot.

You get it on the general ballot, and I'll sure as hell VOTE for it! :D

[K'Nort]

I particularly liked the opening to this article:

Before trial began yesterday in the case of the D.C. judge who sued his neighborhood dry cleaners after they lost his pants, the most extraordinary fact was Roy Pearson's demand for $65 million in damages.

That was before Pearson, an administrative law judge, broke down while testifying about the emotional pain of having the cleaners give him the wrong pants. It was before an 89-year-old woman in a wheelchair told of being chased out of the cleaners by an angry owner. And it was before she compared the owners of Custom Cleaners in open court to Nazis.

"I knew it: It's all my fault," said the reporter from German television who was sitting next to me.

[Typo Lad]

He lost the case and now he's lost his job (http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-67-million-pants,0,4970793.story)

If it's wrong to take pleasure in this, I don't want to be right.

[Sean Walsh]

He lost the case and now he's lost his job (http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-67-million-pants,0,4970793.story)

*Sean looks to Heaven*

You are there! :)

[Puma]

Makes me want to jump for joy!

http://sfxman.com/ttboard/data/ALLVISIT/Cat_Dance.jpg

[Winslow]

Makes me want to jump for joy!

heh, that's awesome.

[Slam_Bradley]

It's really not at all surprising that he lost the case. Losing his job, however, is the icing on the cake.

Justice is served.

[Sir Tim Drake]

http://www.geo-trotter.com/afrique/images/haha.gif

[Valmore]

He lost the case and now he's lost his job (http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-67-million-pants,0,4970793.story)

If it's wrong to take pleasure in this, I don't want to be right.

Ordinarily it's wrong to be happy at someone's misfortune.

However, this doesn't qualify as ordinary.

That jerk deserved to be canned.

[StoneGold]

He lost the case and now he's lost his job (http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-67-million-pants,0,4970793.story)

If it's wrong to take pleasure in this, I don't want to be right.

I can only assume that you are racist.

[BoosterBronze]

Oh the injustice.

Now that he's not a judge anymore he NEEDS pants, now more than ever!

[Michael P]

He lost the case and now he's lost his job (http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-67-million-pants,0,4970793.story)

If it's wrong to take pleasure in this, I don't want to be right.

GARY COLEMAN:
Right now you are down and out and feeling really crappy

NICKY:
I'll say.

GARY COLEMAN:
And when I see how sad you are
It sort of makes me...
Happy!

NICKY:
Happy?!

GARY COLEMAN:
Sorry, Nicky, human nature-
Nothing I can do!
It's...
Schadenfreude!
Making me feel glad that I'm not you.

NICKY:
Well that's not very nice, Gary!

GARY COLEMAN:
I didn't say it was nice! But everybody does it!

D'ja ever clap when a waitress falls and drops a tray of glasses?

NICKY:
Yeah...

GARY COLEMAN:
And ain't it fun to watch figure skaters falling on their asses?

NICKY:
Sure!

GARY COLEMAN:
And don'tcha feel all warm and cozy,
Watching people out in the rain!

NICKY:
You bet!

GARY COLEMAN:
That's...

GARY AND NICKY:
Schadenfreude!

GARY COLEMAN:
People taking pleasure in your pain!

NICKY:
Oh, Schadenfreude, huh?
What's that, some kinda Nazi word?

GARY COLEMAN:
Yup! It's German for "happiness at the misfortune of others!"

NICKY:
"Happiness at the misfortune of others." That is German!

Watching a vegetarian being told she just ate chicken

GARY COLEMAN:
Or watching a frat boy realize just what he put his dick in!

NICKY:
Being on the elevator when somebody shouts "Hold the door!"

GARY AND NICKY:
"No!!!"
Schadenfreude!

GARY COLEMAN:
"Fuck you lady, that's what stairs are for!"

NICKY:
Ooh, how about...
Straight-A students getting Bs?

GARY COLEMAN:
Exes getting STDs!

NICKY:
Waking doormen from their naps!

GARY COLEMAN:
Watching tourists reading maps!

NICKY:
Football players getting tackled!

GARY COLEMAN:
CEOs getting shackled!

NICKY:
Watching actors never reach

GARY AND NICKY:
The ending of their oscar speech!
Schadenfreude!
Schadenfreude!
Schadenfreude!
Schadenfreude!

GARY COLEMAN:
The world needs people like you and me who've been knocked around by fate.
'Cause when people see us, they don't want to be us, and that makes them feel great.

NICKY:
Sure!
We provide a vital service to society!

GARY AND NICKY:
You and me!
Schadenfreude!
Making the world a better place...
Making the world a better place...
Making the world a better place...
To be!

GARY COLEMAN:
S-C-H-A-D-E-N-F-R-E-U-D-E!