More on "Mr. $54 Million For My Lost Pants"
Strong Bad
Posts: 4,277
This guy seriously needs the **** beat out him BAD! If ever there was justification for a major **** whoopin, this is it!I would love to drive down to DC and do it myself! How can this case have even gotten this far??? No wonder our judicial system is the laughing stock of the world!
WASHINGTON - The customer is always right, said a judge who testified Wednesday in his $54 million lawsuit against a dry cleaner who lost his pants. Administrative law judge Roy L. Pearson argued that he is acting in the interest of all city residents against poor business practices. Attorneys for the dry cleaner call his claim "outlandish."
Under cross-examination, Pearson said the District of Columbia Consumer Protection Act, under which he is suing Custom Cleaners, should grant a customer whatever he or she wants if there is a "Satisfaction Guaranteed" sign.
Pearson, 57, originally sued Custom Cleaners for about $65 million by adding up violations under the act and almost $2 million in common law claims. He is no longer seeking damages related to the pants, focusing his claims on two signs in the shop that have since been removed.
Defense attorney Chris Manning asked Pearson repeatedly whether, if he was a merchant, he would pay any customer who asked for compensation. Pearson kept responding with convoluted legal language, and each time Judge Judith Bartnoff instructed him to answer the question. Finally, he said, "Yes."
"So does that make sense, for you instead of going down the street to another dry cleaner, to sue a business for $67 million?" Manning asked.
Pearson said it did.
"Does that make any sense at all?" Manning asked, to laughter from the courtroom.
Bartnoff ruled Wednesday that the "Same Day Service" sign was no longer to be considered, leaving "Satisfaction Guaranteed" the only issue in question.
Pearson alleges that Jin Chung, Soo Chung and Ki Chung, owners of the small business, committed fraud and misled consumers because they put up the signs but did not meet the satisfaction of several customers, including him.
Manning portrayed Pearson as a bitter man with financial troubles stemming from a recent divorce who is taking out his anger on a hardworking family.
Manning went into the details of Pearson's divorce on Wednesday. Under questioning, Pearson confirmed he had only $1,000 to $2,000 to his name when his problems with the dry cleaners started. Pearson said he did not have a job at the time and was collecting unemployment benefits.
Pearson says his problems with Custom Cleaners began in May 2005 when he brought in several suits for alterations. A pair of pants from a blue and maroon suit was missing when he requested it two days later. The Chungs say they found the pants soon after and tried to give them to Pearson, but Pearson insists those are not his. The charcoal-gray, cuffed pants are now evidence.
"I haven't worn pants with cuffs since the 1970s," Pearson said Wednesday. He also submitted into evidence a photograph of every pair of pants in his home to show that he does not like pants with cuffs.
Pearson said Wednesday that he wants only $2 million in damages for himself _ for his mental anguish and inconvenience _ plus $500,000 in attorney's fees for representing himself. Anything more that Bartnoff might award him would go into a fund "to educate people of their rights under the Consumer Protection Act," he said.
No excuses!
Post edited by Strong Bad on
Comments
-
Dude needs a gavel shoved straight up the nether region. A$$ for those of you playing at home.
-
More frivolous lawsuits... :mad:
-
What an ****.Source: Bluesound Node 2i - Preamp/DAC: Benchmark DAC2 DX - Amp: Parasound Halo A21 - Speakers: MartinLogan Motion 60XTi - Shop Rig: Yamaha A-S501 Integrated - Shop Spkrs: Elac Debut 2.0 B5.2
-
how is a dry cleaner company ever going to get 54mil?Never kick a fresh **** on a hot day.
Home Setup: Sony VPL-VW85 Projo, 92" Stewart Firehawk, Pioneer Elite SC-65, PS3, RTi12 fronts, CSi5, FXi6 rears, RTi6 surround backs, RTi4 height, MFW-15 Subwoofer.
Car Setup: OEM Radio, RF 360.2v2, Polk SR6500 quad amped off 4 Xtant 1.1 100w mono amps, Xtant 6.1 to run an eD 13av.2, all Stinger wiring and Raammat deadener. -
Just imagine if this Pearson dude wins.....nah
Can't wait til the verdict comes in. -
Just imagine if this Pearson dude wins.....nah
Can't wait til the verdict comes in.
The bad thing is ,at this point, regardless of the verdict the family is financially ruined. -
I hope someone sees him crossing the street and runs him over.Check your lips at the door woman. Shake your hips like battleships. Yeah, all the white girls trip when I sing at Sunday service.
-
I hope someone sees him crossing the street and runs him over.
But that would ruin his pants!If you will it, dude, it is no dream. -
Too bad DC doesn't have the same law as Oregon regarding frivilous lawsuits. In Oregon if a plantiff's suit is deemed frivilous, they pay all court costs, the defendants legal fees and a healthy fine. This needs to be instituted nationwide. It costs thousands to defend yourself against these ridiculous suits, and even when you win the case, you lose your legal fees.
-
bobman1235 wrote: »But that would ruin his pants!
I know a good dry cleaner:rolleyes: -
Dry Cleaner wins!
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 law 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.
"A reasonable consumer would not interpret 'Satisfaction Guaranteed' to mean that a merchant is required to satisfy a customer's unreasonable demands" or to agree to demands that the merchant would have reasonable grounds for disputing, the judge wrote.
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 trousers from a blue and maroon suit, then tried to give him a pair a pair of charcoal gray pants that he said were not his. He arrived at the amount by adding up years of alleged law violations and almost $2 million in common law fraud claims.
Bartnoff wrote, however, that Pearson failed to prove that the pants the dry cleaner tried to return were not the pants he taken in for alterations.
Pearson later dropped demands for damages related to the pants and focused his claims on signs in the shop, which have since been removed.
The court costs amount to just over $1,000 for photocopying, filing and similar expenses, according to the Chungs' attorney. A motion to recover the Chungs' tens of thousands of dollars in attorney fees will be considered later.
Chris Manning, the Chungs' attorney, praised the ruling, which followed a two-day trial earlier this month.
"Judge Bartnoff has spoken loudly in suggesting that, while consumers should be protected, abusive lawsuits like this will not be tolerated," Manning said in a statement. "Judge Bartnoff has chosen common sense and reasonableness over irrationality and unbridled venom."
Pearson did not immediately respond to a call and an e-mail seeking comment. -
Now, if that guy would just get hit by a bus, I'd be truly happy.If you will it, dude, it is no dream.
-
the dry cleaner owners already spent so much on legal fees, I hope they can try to seek legal fees from the plaintiff.
I heard that the plaintif will probably not be an administrative jusge too long. they are not recomending him to be renewed for his position. sweet Living Room 2 Channel -
Schiit SYS Passive Pre. Jolida CD player. Songbird streamer. California Audio Labs Sigma II DAC, DIY 300as1/a1 Ice modules Class D amp. LSi15 with MM842 woofer upgrade, Nordost Blue Heaven and Unity interconnects.
Upstairs 2 Channel Rig -
Prometheus Ref. TVC passive pre, SAE A-205 Amp, Wiim pro streamer and Topping E50 DAC, California Audio Labs DX1 CD player, Von Schweikert VR3.5 speakers.
Studio Rig - Scarlett 18i20(Gen3) DAW, Mac Mini, Aiyma A07 Max (BridgedX2), Totem Mites -
I hope the Chungs get every dime they spent back, maybe some extra....
-
I'm glad that **** did not win.
-
someone whould kick him in the pants2 CHANNEL
Speaker - Klipsch Heresy II
Under construction -
I'm glad to see the Chungs won this lawsuit. There is justice in the world, after all.
Pearson needs to be sued for the Chungs' legal fees. -
They are going to put in a motion for Chung's fees. A simple way to remedy frivolous lawsuits is to have the loser pay all court costs, that would stop 99% of this cr@p from ever clogging the courts.
-
Bill Ayotte wrote: »I hope the Chungs get every dime they spent back, maybe some extra....
Like pain and suffering on their part. A couple Million like **** wanted for his P&S should suffice.
JohnNo excuses! -
They are going to put in a motion for Chung's fees. A simple way to remedy frivolous lawsuits is to have the loser pay all court costs, that would stop 99% of this cr@p from ever clogging the courts.
Not exactly simple - that would basically prohibit an individual from ever trying to sue a large corporation, since the corporation and its team of lawyers would most likely win (right or wrong), and subsequently bankrupt the plaintiff with millions in court fees.If you will it, dude, it is no dream. -
Anybody hears of a fund that we can contribute to and help get those poor people back on their feet, sing out.
-
George Grand wrote: »Anybody hears of a fund that we can contribute to and help get those poor people back on their feet, sing out.
They had a defense fund set up, I don't know what the situation is now that the lawsuit is over.If you will it, dude, it is no dream. -
Thank you!
-
bobman1235 wrote: »Not exactly simple - that would basically prohibit an individual from ever trying to sue a large corporation, since the corporation and its team of lawyers would most likely win (right or wrong), and subsequently bankrupt the plaintiff with millions in court fees.
I dunno dude - it seems that anytime a person brings a suit against a big company, the individual usually seems to win.
I think the loser pays system would work just fine. If not that then have it to where if you were sued and won, you could sue the person that sued you for time, expense and pain and suffering! This A-hole should be paying out his a-hole for the rest of his life for nearly ruining these peoples lives.polkaudio sound quality competitor since 2005
MECA SQ Rookie of the Year 06 ~ MECA State Champ 06,07,08,11 ~ MECA World Finals 2nd place 06,07,08,09
08 Car Audio Nationals 1st ~ 07 N Georgia Nationals 1st ~ 06 Carl Casper Nationals 1st ~ USACi 05 Southeast AutumnFest 1st
polkaudio SR6500 --- polkaudio MM1040 x2 -- Pioneer P99 -- Rockford Fosgate P1000X5D -
I dunno dude - it seems that anytime a person brings a suit against a big company, the individual usually seems to win.
Tell that to anyone who's tried to sue Disney.
I still say it's not realistic, unless you have guidelines on what can be reimbursed. If I'm wronged by a company, I will be at a severe disadvantage if hte possibility of my losing means I have to pay MILLIONS to cover their legal fees.If you will it, dude, it is no dream. -
bobman1235 wrote: »Not exactly simple - that would basically prohibit an individual from ever trying to sue a large corporation, since the corporation and its team of lawyers would most likely win (right or wrong), and subsequently bankrupt the plaintiff with millions in court fees.
Cover "reasonable" lawyer costs would the correct way, meaning a corporation could spent millions on lawyers if they chose to but only the reasonable part would be repaid if they won.
Do these rediculous lawsuits go through a screening process where lawyers aren't involved? Blame the system for this to ever getting this far. Individual person does need some protection from court costs. I am already building my finances in a way where I can leave the country, or file bankruptcy with most of my money save if there ever is a need due to a large liability. -
The Korean folks should countersue as a hate crime. I'm sure that judge has experienced what he's considered poor customer service someplace else that posts "Satisfaction Guaranteed" but I'm sure most of those places involve large corporations. Why pick on these little business owners? Because they're easy targets?
Stupid. -
The Korean folks should countersue as a hate crime.
That would be a hoot as Pearson is black and the Chung's are Asian. Can one minority be charged with a hate crime against another minority? I thought only whites could be charged with a hate crime. Equal justice for all....yeah right!
That whole hate crime thing is ridiculous anyway. If someone commits a crime against another, of course they don't like the other person.
Of interest, when Pearson filed his suit, he had about a thousand dollars to his name and was going thru a divorce. Puts things in perspective, eh!?! I hope the putz has to eat out of a dumpster for the rest of his sorry **** life.Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
One of my joys in life is seeing life play out as it could be and should be.
Life is good.
Sal Palooza -
That would be a hoot as Pearson is black and the Chung's are Asian. Can one minority be charged with a hate crime against another minority? I thought only whites could be charged with a hate crime. Equal justice for all....yeah right!
Poetic? Sure. Justice? Not so sure. Hoot? Yep. Unlikely? Yep, yep, yep.
