STYLETHREAD -- LET'S TALK SHOP!

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
stylethread site home page -> stylethread forum -> current events -> Here's a Frivolous Lawsuit
Post Info TOPIC: Here's a Frivolous Lawsuit
kealoha


Kate Spade

Status: Offline
Posts: 1107
Date:
Here's a Frivolous Lawsuit
Permalink Closed

Dry cleaner wins in $54 million suit for pants
Judge rules plaintiff must pay court costs
The Associated Press
Updated: 1:35 p.m. CT June 25, 2007

function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('633183933221100000');

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 once displayed 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.

Pearson, an administrative law judge, originally sought $67 million from the Chungs, claiming they lost a pair of suit trousers and later tried to give him a pair that he said was not his. He arrived at the amount by adding up years of alleged 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, argued that no reasonable person would interpret the signs to mean an unconditional promise of satisfaction.

The Chungs said the trial had taken an enormous financial and emotional toll on them and exposed them to widespread ridicule.

The two-day trial earlier this month drew a standing-room-only crowd and overshadowed the drunken driving trial of former Mayor Marion Barry.

© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19414287/


__________________



Maat


Kenneth Cole

Status: Offline
Posts: 401
Date:
Permalink Closed

Good! I am happy to hear this. I get so angry when I hear that people get millions of dollars for frivolous reasons. At most, he was entitled to an amount equalling the cost of the pants, a new suit jacket to match, and maybe a little more for the inconvenience of having to find another suit to replace this one. At MOST!

This part infuriates me:
"Pearson, an administrative law judge, originally sought $67 million from the Chungs, claiming they lost a pair of suit trousers and later tried to give him a pair that he said was not his. He arrived at the amount by adding up years of alleged law violations and almost $2 million in common law claims."

Why is this one asshat entitled to $67 million for other people's losses?

__________________
lynnie


Chanel

Status: Offline
Posts: 3612
Date:
Permalink Closed

This case makes me absolutely FURIOUS.  He should be paying millions to the drycleaners for all the heartache he's created.  Over PANTS.  You don't ruin lives over that. 

__________________

my fashion/style thoughts www.poetryofpause.com 
orlando


Nine West

Status: Offline
Posts: 65
Date:
Permalink Closed

"Why is this one asshat entitled to $67 million for other people's losses?"

This cracks me up!!!!  Have you read anything by MaryJanice Davidson?  She's the only one I've know to use the word asshat!  I liked it so much I've been calling people that! (Under my breath, of course)



__________________
atlgirl


Gucci

Status: Offline
Posts: 2881
Date:
Permalink Closed

kealoha wrote:

Dry cleaner wins in $54 million suit for pants

Judge rules plaintiff must pay court costs
The Associated Press
Updated: 1:35 p.m. CT June 25, 2007

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 once displayed in the store window, District of Columbia Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff ruled.

Chris Manning, the Chungs' attorney, argued that no reasonable person would interpret the signs to mean an unconditional promise of satisfaction.



 I agree about the frivolousness...but how WOULD you interpret the signs of "Satisfaction Guaranteed"? It's rather vague and does (did) leave them open to all sorts of interpretation.

The lawyer who sued is part of the reason lawyers are the butt of jokes (apologies to our legal ladies here) across the country. What an idiot!


__________________

"Good taste shouldn't have to cost anything extra." - Mickey Drexler
Jahni


Dooney & Bourke

Status: Offline
Posts: 826
Date:
Permalink Closed

atlgirl wrote:

The lawyer who sued is part of the reason lawyers are the butt of jokes (apologies to our legal ladies here) across the country. What an idiot!

I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure he represented himself...he's an Admin Law Judge...surely he wouldn't find anyone else stupid enough to take this case...I'm glad he got saddled with the legal fees for all parties...to bad the Judge couldn't award damages to the defendants...



__________________

It's pronounced "Johnny," like the boys name....but spelled like an Indian Zuchini.
Bastet


Kate Spade

Status: Offline
Posts: 1425
Date:
Permalink Closed

Jahni wrote:

 

atlgirl wrote:

The lawyer who sued is part of the reason lawyers are the butt of jokes (apologies to our legal ladies here) across the country. What an idiot!

I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure he represented himself...he's an Admin Law Judge...surely he wouldn't find anyone else stupid enough to take this case...I'm glad he got saddled with the legal fees for all parties...to bad the Judge couldn't award damages to the defendants...

 


This happened in my city.  He's an ALJ for the DC gov't and he did represent himself.  As part of his lawsuit, he tried to get attorneys fees for himself at $400/hr!! furious  The dry cleaners filed a motion to get him to pay their attorneys' fees, which are in the tens of thousands.  I hope he has to pay and that he gets disbarred.  What a jackass! 

 



__________________
AllieGurl


Marc Jacobs

Status: Offline
Posts: 2030
Date:
Permalink Closed

Shame on a JUDGE for suing a small business and ruining there lives over a pair of lost pants.

They should sue him for damages in destroying there businness.

__________________
xoxo gossip girl!
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
stylethread site home page -> stylethread forum -> current events -> Here's a Frivolous Lawsuit
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard