Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Keep On Trekkin! You are currently viewing our forum as a guest. In order to join in on community discussion and enjoy other member-only features, you must first register an account. Once your registration is complete, you will be able to continue your Trek here at KOT.


Click Here To Register and Join Our Community!

Please contact us HERE if you have any questions or you need assistance with your registration. Posted Image


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Mult-Quote Post Mult-Quote Post
Add Reply
Judge sues cleaner for $65M over pants
Topic Started: May 3 2007, 08:56 AM (239 Views)
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar


Judge sues cleaner for $65M over pants

Quote:
 
The Chungs, immigrants from 
South Korea, realized their American dream when they opened their dry-cleaning business seven years ago in the nation's capital. For the past two years, however, they've been dealing with the nightmare of litigation: a $65 million lawsuit over a pair of missing pants.

Jin Nam Chung, Ki Chung and their son, Soo Chung, are so disheartened that they're considering moving back to Seoul, said their attorney, Chris Manning, who spoke on their behalf.

"They're out a lot of money, but more importantly, incredibly disenchanted with the system," Manning said. "This has destroyed their lives."

The lawsuit was filed by a District of Columbia administrative hearings judge, Roy Pearson, who has been representing himself in the case.

Pearson did not return phone calls and e-mails Wednesday from The Associated Press requesting comment.

According to court documents, the problem began in May 2005 when Pearson became a judge and brought several suits for alteration to Custom Cleaners in Northeast Washington, a place he patronized regularly despite previous disagreements with the Chungs. A pair of pants from one suit was not ready when he requested it two days later, and was deemed to be missing.

Pearson asked the cleaners for the full price of the suit: more than $1,000.

But a week later, the Chungs said the pants had been found and refused to pay. That's when Pearson decided to sue.

Manning said the cleaners made three settlement offers to Pearson. First they offered $3,000, then $4,600, then $12,000. But Pearson wasn't satisfied and expanded his calculations beyond one pair of pants.

Because Pearson no longer wanted to use his neighborhood dry cleaner, part of his lawsuit calls for $15,000 — the price to rent a car every weekend for 10 years to go to another business.

"He's somehow purporting that he has a constitutional right to a dry cleaner within four blocks of his apartment," Manning said.

But the bulk of the $65 million comes from Pearson's strict interpretation of D.C.'s consumer protection law, which fines violators $1,500 per violation, per day. According to court papers, Pearson added up 12 violations over 1,200 days, and then multiplied that by three defendants.

Much of Pearson's case rests on two signs that Custom Cleaners once had on its walls: "Satisfaction Guaranteed" and "Same Day Service."

Based on Pearson's dissatisfaction and the delay in getting back the pants, he claims the signs amount to fraud.

Pearson has appointed himself to represent all customers affected by such signs, though D.C. Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz, who will hear the June 11 trial, has said that this is a case about one plaintiff, and one pair of pants.

Sherman Joyce, president of the American Tort Association, has written a letter to the group of men who will decide this week whether to renew Pearson's 10-year appointment. Joyce is asking them to reconsider.

Chief Administrative Judge Tyrone Butler had no comment regarding Pearson's reappointment.

The association, which tries to police the kind of abusive lawsuits that hurt small businesses, also has offered to buy Pearson the suit of his choice.

And former National Labors Relations Board chief administrative law judge Melvin Welles wrote to The Washington Post to urge "any bar to which Mr. Pearson belongs to immediately disbar him and the District to remove him from his position as an administrative law judge."

"There has been a significant groundswell of support for the Chungs," said Manning, adding that plans for a defense fund Web site are in the works.

To the Chungs and their attorney, one of the most frustrating aspects of the case is their claim that Pearson's gray pants were found a week after Pearson dropped them off in 2005. They've been hanging in Manning's office for more than a year.

Pearson claims in court documents that his pants had blue and red pinstripes.

"They match his inseam measurements. The ticket on the pants match his receipt," Manning said.

I saw this on the news last night.

This lawsuit is ridiculous. And a judge is perpetuating this frivolous lawsuit. He was probably entitled to a very small compensation for his troubles, but this is nuts.

I would love to see a judge throw this case out and require Pearson to reimburse the Chung's court costs.

Pearson sounds like a little child who was slightly inconvenienced and has now decided to punish others by throwing a large scale :hissyfit:.
PM Offline Member Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Captain Pineapple
Member Avatar
Lt. Junior Grade
This Pearson guys sounds like a real a-hole, ready to destroy a family over this
PM Offline Member Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TribbleMom
Member Avatar
Rear Admiral
Sounds like someone needs to learn priorities and what's really important in life. This guy is just a big whannie-butt. :cry:
PM Offline Member Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar


That is the biggest tragedy about this situation. The Chung's will probably be forced out of business because of this jerk.
PM Offline Member Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TribbleMom
Member Avatar
Rear Admiral
Perhaps they could counter-sue. I don't know much about business law, but surely if he can sue them for the potential cost of having to take his dry cleaning elsewhere, then they should be able to sue him for the potential loss of all their future business.
PM Offline Member Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mfive
Member Avatar
The Cosmic Soul Brother
I can't believe this judge. :headscratch:
PM Offline Member Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TribbleMom
Member Avatar
Rear Admiral
Well, it's in the courtroom now ...

http://www.comcast.net/news/strange/index..../12/687993.html

WASHINGTON - A judge had to leave the courtroom with tears running down his face Tuesday after recalling the lost pair of trousers that led to his $54 million lawsuit against a dry cleaner.

Administrative law judge Roy L. Pearson had argued earlier in his opening statement that he is acting in the interest of all city residents against poor business practices. Defense attorneys called his claim "outlandish."

He originally sued Custom Cleaners for about $65 million under the District of Columbia consumer protection act and almost $2 million in common law claims. He is no longer seeking damages related to the pants, instead focusing his claims on two signs in the shop that have since been removed.

He alleges that Jin Chung, Soo Chung and Ki Chung, owners of the mom-and-pop business, committed fraud and misled consumers with signs that claimed "Satisfaction Guaranteed" and "Same Day Service."

Pearson, representing himself, said in opening that he wanted to examine the culture that allowed "a group of defendants to engage in bad business practices for five years."

An attorney for the Chungs portrayed Pearson as a bitter man with financial troubles stemming from a recent divorce who is taking out his anger on a hardworking family.

"This case is very simple. It's about one sign and the plaintiff's outlandish interpretation," attorney Chris Manning said.

The Chungs were to present their case Wednesday. Manning asked D.C. Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff to award them reimbursement for their legal costs if they win.

Pearson called several witnesses Tuesday who testified that they stopped going to Custom Cleaners after problems with misplaced clothes.

Pearson also called himself as a witness, saying his problems 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. He said Soo Chung tried to give him a pair of charcoal gray pants.

As Pearson explained that those weren't the pants for the suit, he choked up and left the courtroom crying after asking Bartnoff for a break.

Pearson originally asked the cleaners for the full price of the suit, which was more than $1,000. But because the Chungs insisted the pants had been found, they refused to pay.

Manning has said the cleaners made three settlement offers to Pearson, but the judge was not satisfied and increased his demands _ including asking for money to rent a car so he could drive to another business.
-----------------------------------
Isn't there something wrong with this guy crying in court over some lost pants? :blink:
PM Offline Member Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar


This guy is totally off his rocker. :wacko:

All of this over a freakin' pair of pants. I :askfor: that the jury decides against this yahoo.
PM Offline Member Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TribbleMom
Member Avatar
Rear Admiral
Frankly, I hope the court orders him to pay all the costs involved for both parties just because of the colossal waste of time this is.

Here's a bit more information:

http://www.comcast.net/news/strange/index..../13/689020.html

Defense attorney Chris 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 said 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.

PM Offline Member Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar


So he only wants $2 Million for himself and the rest to educate people? :rolleyes:

I still can't believe how ridiculous this man is. If he was going to go after someone, then he should have orchestrated something with a huge company. I say orchestrated, because I wouldn't put it past him to have set this whole incident up.
PM Offline Member Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar


There is hope for the justice system!! :clap:

And Pearson has been ordered to pay the Chung's court costs! :wow:


Judge Rules in Favor of Dry Cleaner in $54 Million Lawsuit Over Lost Pants

Quote:
 
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 that was once placed 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.


Length of article as of 10:43am EST.
PM Offline Member Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TribbleMom
Member Avatar
Rear Admiral
Thank goodness the presiding judge had the guts to call Pearson's suit "unreasonable." And that, I think, was being kind.
PM Offline Member Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Extra! Extra! Read All About It! · Next Topic »
Add Reply


DISCLAIMER (Click and Scroll to read): Keep On Trekkin’ is a Science Fiction discussion community. We are not officially associated with, or endorsed by, Paramount Pictures Corporation, CBS Studios Inc. or Viacom Inc. Star Trek®, in all its various forms, is a registered trademark of Paramount Pictures Corporation (CBS/Paramount Television and CBS Studios Inc.). Any Star Trek® image used at this website will be for decorative or informational purposes only. Star Trek artwork 2008 PARAMOUNT PICTURES. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. All other trademarks and copyrights are the property of their respective holders. All themes used here at Keep On Trekkin' (unless otherwise notated on the theme) were created by 24thcenstfan. Special thanks to everyone who has provided emoticons, graphics and other services used for the creation of this website. Opinions expressed by the membership here at Keep On Trekkin’ do not reflect those of the Administrator of this Board or ZetaBoards.