The Case of the Missing Pants

Xavier Onasis makes a solid point about a lawsuit filed by the father of a drunk driver who was killed because of his drunk (and possibly high) driving.

But believe it or not, that's not the most ridiculous lawsuit in the news these days.

Consider this story from (big surprise) the Washington, D.C., area:

A customer got so steamed when a dry cleaner lost his trousers that he sued for $65 million. Two years later, he is still pressing his [law]suit. ...

..(T)he problem began in May 2005 when Pearson became a judge and brought several suits for alterations to Custom Cleaners in Washington. A pair of pants from one suit was missing when he requested it two days later.

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

Now, we've come to expect this kind of idiocy from the Jerry Springer set. But the idiot plaintiff in this case was a freakin' JUDGE!!!

And it gets better...

... (T)he cleaners have made three settlement offers to Pearson: $3,000, then $4,600, then $12,000.

But Pearson was not satisfied and expanded his calculations beyond one pair of pants. Because Pearson no longer wanted to use his neighborhood dry cleaner, he asked in his lawsuit for $15,000 -- the cost of renting a car every weekend for 10 years to go to another business.

Manning said Pearson somehow thinks he has the right to a dry cleaner within four blocks of his apartment.

The bulk of the $65 million demand comes from Pearson's strict interpretation of Washington consumer protection law, which imposes fines of $1,500 per violation, per day. Pearson counted 12 violations over 1,200 days, then multiplied that by three defendants.

But a week later, the Chungs said the pants had been found and refused to pay. Pearson said those were not his pants, and decided to take the Chungs to the cleaners and sue.

I'd like to give this judge the benefit of the doubt. I'd like to think he's doing this to set an example of how bad these frivolous lawsuits are becoming.

But as a judge, he should know better. There is enough abuse in the legal system already, and everybody knows it.

Thankfully, a large segment of the public is behind the real victims in this case. Attorneys for the South Korean immigrant owners of the dry cleaners have been inundated with donations to help the Chung's pay their legal defense costs. A defense fund has been set up at www.customcleanersdefensefund.com.

Now, how do I donate to the fund to get that judge disbarred?

tagged: South Korean, cleaners, judge, Jin Nam Chung, Roy Pearson, frivolous, lawsuit