Do I Smell a "Countersuit" Coming?

MikeC

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
7,636
City & State/Province
Alabama
Dry cleaner wins in missing-pants case
AP via Yahoo!News ^ | June 25, 2007 | LUBNA TAKRURI


Posted on 06/25/2007 7:56:09 AM PDT by Kaslin


WASHINGTON - A judge on Monday ruled in favor of a dry cleaner that was sued for $54 million over a missing pair of pants in a case that garnered international attention and renewed calls for litigation reform.

District of Columbia Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff ruled that the Korean immigrant 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.

"Plaintiff Roy L. Pearson, Jr. takes nothing from the defendants, and defendants Soo Chung, Jin Nam Chung and Ki Y. Chung are awarded the costs of this action against the plaintiff Roy L. Pearson, Jr.," the ruling read.

Pearson, an administrative law judge, originally sought $67 million from the Chungs after he claimed they lost a pair of suit trousers and later tried to return a pair that he said was not his. He arrived at the figure by adding up years of 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, countered that no reasonable person would interpret the signs to be an unconditional promise of satisfaction.

The two-day trial earlier this month drew a standing-room-only crowd, including many Korean and international media outlets covering the story. It even overshadowed the drunken driving trial of former Mayor Marion Barry.

The Chungs also said the trial had taken an enormous financial and emotional toll on them and exposed them to widespread ridicule.
 
The whole thing was pretty much ridiculus, the guy sueing was a judge too, I say finally someone had some common sense, with the verdict.

GMN
 
GMN":3toks7uu said:
The whole thing was pretty much ridiculus, the guy sueing was a judge too, I say finally someone had some common sense, with the verdict.

GMN

I was injured pretty bad years ago on a piece of property. Lawyer (one of my clients) came by to see me while I was on the mend. He started telling me all the ways we could sue and how much money I could get without ever having to go to court. Told him I didn't believe in it and it was just an accident. He said the property owner probably gave me a big X-mas gift for not suing him. I said, "no, you didn't even thank me". He was in utter shock and retracted everything he told me.

People should just live by the golden rule.JMO
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
I am glad. To think that someone, and isn't that guy a judge himself?, would sue for that amount of money over pants. I think that guy should not be able to sit on the bench or practice law. That's what's wrong with this country.
 
That's what's wrong with this country.

That is definitely part of what is wrong with it.

But, on the other hand, we could live in other countries where we wouldn't have the right to sue or anything else.

Soap-box, Soap-box, Soap-box, Soap-box.....
 
The man is a Judge he should know better than anyone not to bring such frivolous lawsuits into our courts. He should have to pay the amount he asked for to the Cleaners and then be removed as a Judge.

I hope these people get Millions out of him!!
 
I think he should be removed from the bench. Crying over a pair of pants! :shock: Hope those cleaners get court costs and what it cost them to appar in court..
 
What gets me is did you see how he came up with his figure. Eventually he even dropped the claim for his pants and was just suing on general idiocracy.
 
Angus/Brangus":3c95rk9g said:
peg4x4":3c95rk9g said:
I think he should be removed from the bench. Crying over a pair of pants! :shock: Hope those cleaners get court costs and what it cost them to appar in court..

Those costs were probably minor compared to their attorney fees whch they should also counter sue for in addition to mental anquish just to teach the judge a lesson in frivolity.

I think I heard their lawyer fees were $100,000 I think they should also get money for the damage they did to the reputation of their cleaners. As well as mental anguish, could you imagine the sleepless nights and depression that they had, thinking a Judge brought such a case had to make them think they might loose everything.
 
They dont have to countersue to recoup the cost of the action. It was covered in the ruling.
 
Remember that movie "Wall Street" where the guy said "Greed is Good". Reminds me of this. Just trying to make money at somebody elses expense, namely 'ours'. Remove him from the bench. Judes shouldn't be able to sue frivolously. Serious sruff, yes, like a drunk running into your grandkids and scaring them to death............ DAM, I'm mad about this. The Putz.

Dick
 

Latest posts

Back
Top