Us Judge Sues Dry Cleaners Fo Loesing His Pants

[el guapo]

Judge sues dry cleaners over lost trousers

By Alex Spillius in Washington

Last Updated: 2:03am BST 03/05/2007



It gives the phrase "taking someone to the cleaners" new meaning: a Washington judge who says his local dry cleaners lost a pair of trousers is suing them for £33.5 million ($67 million).

The dispute began in 2002 when Roy Pearson took a pair of trousers into Custom Cleaners in his neighbourhood, Fort Lincoln. He never saw them again.

The owners, Jim and Soo Chung, offered £75 ($150) in compensation, which was accepted.

advertisement

Relations were patched up and three years later, shortly after being appointed a tribunal judge, Mr Pearson took in another pair of trousers and asked them to be let out a few inches. In court papers, he claims they too were lost. The Chungs insist that they were found a week later and say they have the stub to prove it.

Mr Pearson's first letter of complaint to the Chungs sought £575 ($1,150) so he could buy a new suit. Then lawyers got involved. The Chungs offered Mr Pearson £1,500 ($3,000), then £2,300 ($4,600) and, finally, said their lawyer, Chris Manning, £6,000 ($12,000) to settle the case.

But Mr Pearson, who sits on government tribunals, refused to back down. He based his writ on the cleaners' failure to fulfil two signs in their window that read: "Satisfaction Guaranteed" and "Same Day Service".

He reached the figure of $67,292,000 as follows: Washington's consumer protection law provides for damages of $1,500 per violation per day. Mr Pearson started multiplying: 12 violations over 1,200 days, times three defendants (the Chungs and their son).

He also included £7,500 ($15,000) to rent a car every weekend for several years, arguing that he didn't own a car and had to drive to a cleaner in another locality.

He is also seeking £250,000 ($500,000) in emotional damages and £271,000 ($542,000) in legal fees, though he is representing himself.

Mr Pearson has set the Chungs and their lawyers a long list of questions, which includes: "Please identify by name, full address and telephone number, all cleaners known to you on May 1, 2005 in the District of Columbia, the United States and the world that advertise 'SATISFACTION GUARANTEED'," according to the Washington Post.

The Chungs have removed the signs upon which Mr Pearson's case rests.

"This case shocks me on a daily basis," said their lawyer, Mr Manning. "Pearson has a lot of time on his hands, and the Chungs have been abused in a ghastly way. It's going to cost them tens of thousands to defend this case."

Soo Chung, speaking through an interpreter to ABC News yesterday, broke down in tears. "It's been so difficult. I just want to go home, go back to Korea."

Mr Pearson did not return calls. The trial is due to start next month.

[crazygal]

How on earth could it have gone so far? He should have been sectioned!

[Indian Princess]

67 million, hummmmmmmmmm, I had brass buttons on a wool coat lost at a dry cleaner once, thats about um, ah, 2 million easy!

[WonderWendy3]

**shakes head in dis-belief**

[RedGlitter]

That guy oughtta be shot.

I totally believe in suing people when necessary if that's the only way to get justice/revenge, but this is ludicrous.

[neffy]

i used to work in a dry cleaners in fact i have got a degree in it:) but i could tell you lot some tales :yh_rotfl

[gmc]

It's basically extortion is it not? Surely the court would throw out such a frivolous case?

[yuki]

The court should not only throw the case out but that judge should be sent to jail for contempt of court for filing such a frivolous lawsuit.

[Bill Sikes]

From "The Daily Telegraph" at:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... dge125.xml

"Dry cleaners win in $54m lost-trousers suit

A US judge has ruled in favour of South Korean dry cleaners who were sued for $54 million (£27 million) by a judge over a missing pair of trousers."

The cost of this case must've been considerable. Hopefully, judge Roy Pearson will have to pay the costs of the defendants, as well as court costs, and his own legal fees (if any).

BTW, "Telegraph" writer: Ha ha, nice puns.

[G-man]

That's ridiculous... these poor victimised people should be rewarded a big counter judgement for being put through all this nonsense... this guy is an *** and should be removed from his position and have his license taken away.