Pants Suit Update

[NoZed Avenger]

You remember the $67 million lawsuit against cleaners for allegedly losing a pair of pants?

The Administrative Law Judge that brought the suit lost, but that doesn't mean the cleaners won:

Roy Pearson, the D.C. administrative law judge whose $67 million lawsuit against his neighborhood dry cleaners turned into a worldwide lesson in how one obsessed person can hijack the American legal system, lost his case in court, but today delivered the crowning blow to the owners of Custom Cleaners:

Bowing to the emotional and financial strains of two years of litigation, Soo and Jin Chung today announced the closing of the dry cleaners that may or may not have lost a pair of Pearson's pants that he put in for a $10 alteration in 2005.

* * *

In addition to the heavy emotional toll, the lawsuit proved to be a big drag on revenues at Custom Cleaners, located on Bladensburg Road NE. When Pearson first started gathering material for his aggressive legal battle, he posted fliers on light poles all around the Fort Lincoln neighborhood, asking residents if they had been ripped off by Custom and announcing his own displeasure with the service there. Business declined significantly after that and never rebounded, said Choi and the Chungs' lawyer, Christopher Manning.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/rawfisher/2007/09/pants_update_the_dry_cleaners.html?hpid=topnews

Sigh.

[notsoshocked]

I believe that was the judges intent all along, to drag it out till they were forced to close. He represented himself so no legal fees on his part. What a shame the courts can allow this type of crap to go on, especially from one of it's own.

[madurobob]

Clearly this prick intended to drive the cleaners out of business after they failed to capitulate to his initial threats/demands. One would think the cleaner's have a pretty good malicious prosecution case against the judge, but no way to fund it and no desire to drag this out any further.

What bugs me is the prick is still a judge - or at least still in line to be reinstated, IIRC.

[NoZed Avenger]

Clearly this prick intended to drive the cleaners out of business after they failed to capitulate to his initial threats/demands. One would think the cleaner's have a pretty good malicious prosecution case against the judge, but no way to fund it and no desire to drag this out any further.


He doesn't have enough in the way of seizable assets to do them any good -- unless you count the $2,000 suits.

[madurobob]

Maybe we should make lawyers carry malpractice insurance!;)

That might fix a lot of things...

[this charming man]

oh sorry I came in here looking for the new fall line of women's clothes.

[TragicMonkey]

If I were those dry cleaners, I'd organize an industry-wide boycott of doing that man's dry cleaning.