Dry Cleaner Wins In Missing Pants Case

[Kor37 9]

Dry Cleaner Wins in Missing Pants Case

By LUBNA TAKRURI,

AP

Posted: 2007-06-25 11:11:57

WASHINGTON (June 25) -- 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.

 

 

The dry cleaner's owners said the trial had taken a large financial and emotional toll on them.

 

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.

 

 

 

I couldn't find the original thread this story was under but anyway.........Good for them! Sanity has prevailed!

[Wishfire 2]

The two-day trial earlier this month... even overshadowed the drunken driving trial of former Mayor Marion Barry.

 

I'll say... this is the first I've even heard of that.

[Odie 0]

I first heard this on Fox, I believe, and I just could not believe happen to the family. I am glad the ruling in favor for the family.

[trekz 7]

A case of a judge trying to take the cleaners to the cleaners.

 

This case does seem like a textbook case of a frivoulous law"suit" However, I hope that when lawsuit reform comes up, the pendulum doesn't swing too far the other way to overprotect companies and businesses. There are certainly times when businesses and companies are truly at fault and in those cases they should makes things right with their customers imo.

[Gummy 0]

Just another example of a frivolous lawsuit clogging up the courts.

[Theunicornhunter 2]

Actually, I suspect there was something else going on here - that fueled the judges antipathy and the pants were really a cover for something else.

 

I know there was speculation the judge would get disbarred for bringing this suit.

 

Trekz, you are absolutely right - and many of the proposed "reforms" would remove all protecton for the public.

 

IMO, establishing universal limits and/or formulas for calculating certain types of losses would remove a lot of the uncertainty out of cases and encourage more parties to settle.

 

And, ironically, a universal health care system would also eliminate the need for lawsuits - much of what people sue for is medical costs.

 

And people that make snap judgments on a few lines in a newspaper often miss the issues at the heart of the matter. Snap judgments could have serious consequences for the public.

[Gummy 0]

Actually, I suspect there was something else going on here - that fueled the judges antipathy and the pants were really a cover for something else.

 

I know there was speculation the judge would get disbarred for bringing this suit.

 

Trekz, you are absolutely right - and many of the proposed "reforms" would remove all protecton for the public.

 

IMO, establishing universal limits and/or formulas for calculating certain types of losses would remove a lot of the uncertainty out of cases and encourage more parties to settle.

 

And, ironically, a universal health care system would also eliminate the need for lawsuits - much of what people sue for is medical costs.

 

And people that make snap judgments on a few lines in a newspaper often miss the issues at the heart of the matter. Snap judgments could have serious consequences for the public.

I'm all for a Universal Health Care Plan for this nation. I've been saying that for years.

[Kor37 9]

Actually, I suspect there was something else going on here - that fueled the judges antipathy and the pants were really a cover for something else.

 

I know there was speculation the judge would get disbarred for bringing this suit.

 

Trekz, you are absolutely right - and many of the proposed "reforms" would remove all protecton for the public.

 

IMO, establishing universal limits and/or formulas for calculating certain types of losses would remove a lot of the uncertainty out of cases and encourage more parties to settle.

 

And, ironically, a universal health care system would also eliminate the need for lawsuits - much of what people sue for is medical costs.

 

And people that make snap judgments on a few lines in a newspaper often miss the issues at the heart of the matter. Snap judgments could have serious consequences for the public.

 

 

I'm all for a Universal Health Care Plan for this nation. I've been saying that for years.

 

We already have Universal health care......oh wait......thats just for illegal aliens....

[Gummy 0]

Actually, I suspect there was something else going on here - that fueled the judges antipathy and the pants were really a cover for something else.

 

I know there was speculation the judge would get disbarred for bringing this suit.

 

Trekz, you are absolutely right - and many of the proposed "reforms" would remove all protecton for the public.

 

IMO, establishing universal limits and/or formulas for calculating certain types of losses would remove a lot of the uncertainty out of cases and encourage more parties to settle.

 

And, ironically, a universal health care system would also eliminate the need for lawsuits - much of what people sue for is medical costs.

 

And people that make snap judgments on a few lines in a newspaper often miss the issues at the heart of the matter. Snap judgments could have serious consequences for the public.

Yes, it's sad when the Illegals can get health care when our own seniors can't get it. What's wrong with this picture?

 

I'm all for a Universal Health Care Plan for this nation. I've been saying that for years.

 

We already have Universal health care......oh wait......thats just for illegal aliens....

[Kor37 9]

UPDATE:

Judge Continues to Press Pants Suit

AP

Posted: 2007-07-11 21:54:12

WASHINGTON (AP) - A customer who sued a dry cleaner for $54 million over a missing pair of pants has asked the judge who threw out the widely mocked case to reconsider, saying she committed a "fundamental legal error."

 

Roy L. Pearson, a local administrative law judge, argued Wednesday that District of Columbia Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff failed to address his legal claims. Bartnoff had 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 unambiguous guarantee of satisfaction the defendant-merchant chose to advertise for seven years," Pearson wrote. "That was a fundamental legal error."

 

If Bartnoff rejects Pearson's motion, he could take the matter to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.

 

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 store owners said the pants had been found, but Pearson denied that they were his and decided to sue.

 

Pearson's suit, which originally sought $67 million, 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.

 

 

 

This Bozo just won't give up!

[Odie 0]

Of course he won't give up. He sounds like a person that does not like losing. What really bothers me the most the dry cleaner offered to pay for the missing pants. A normal person would have taken the money, and might not do business with them again.

[thestupidvulcan 0]

obviously this person isn't normal.

[Kor37 9]

UPDATE:

 

$54 Million Pants Star in Fundraiser

AP

Posted: 2007-07-25 09:37:53

Filed Under: Law, Nation

WASHINGTON (July 24) - A now-famous pair of pants was the star attraction at a fundraiser Tuesday meant to help pay the bills of a dry-cleaner couple caught in a legal stitch.

 

The $54 million pants, as they've come to be known, were the subject of a widely mocked lawsuit that garnered international attention. Now, they have their own security guard.

 

Groups advocating stricter guidelines for filing lawsuits and supporters of Jin Nam Chung and Soo Chung, the owners of Custom Cleaners, came from across the country to attend the cocktail fundraiser.

 

On display were what the Chungs say are the pants that Roy Pearson brought in, were misplaced, and were later found. The guests had appetizers and cocktails, and under the stern gaze of the security guard, some posed for photos with the pants.

 

The Chungs successfully defended themselves from the $54 million suit, which originally demanded $67 million, but they now owe about $100,000 in legal costs.

 

The American Tort Reform Association and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform put on the fundraiser in hopes of defraying the Chungs' costs. The fundraiser netted more than $64,000, with more pledges still coming in, organizers said.

 

"Without your support, the Chungs could very well have gone bankrupt," defense attorney Chris Manning told the crowd of about 150.

 

The Chungs also made a rare appearance to thank their guests.

 

The organizers said they also wanted to raise visibility for their mission to change tort law in the face of lawsuits that unfairly target small businesses.

 

"Our motto is the spirit of free enterprise," said Lisa Rickard, president of the Institute for Legal Reform. "The Chungs epitomize that in our perspective. They've really been living the American dream, and that all came to a halt with the filing of this lawsuit."

 

"It's our hope to help them do a course correction and get back on track," Rickard said.

 

Manning said that if the court grants the Chungs' motion for Pearson to pay their legal fees, proceeds from the fundraiser that exceed the family's costs would be donated to charity.

 

Pearson did not respond to an e-mail from The Associated Press requesting comment.

http://cdn.channel.aol.com/aolnews_photos/...725070509990014

[trekz 7]

Both sides in this case continue to press on. And they're both steamed about the issue.

 

I'm glad that the fund raiser raised money for the cleaners who have apparently gone through a lot.

 

I am still concerned that tort reform could go too far and prevent some consumers from suing companies or individuals (including doctors) that make mistakes or do not provide the services they promise. Consumers deserve some legal remedies if big or small businesses don't deliver, or if they provide shoddy products or services imo.

[Kor37 9]

UPDATE:

 

The idiot judge who was suing the drycleaners was relieved of his job this week. Justice prevails!