The 67 million dollar britches... a lawyer story - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Push-Pull · 05-02-2007, 06:00 AM

This is just.....astounding and saddening at the same time. How on earth can this be considered reasonable? I only hope that the judgeship this guy holds is an elected one, then maybe he'll get his come next election.

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=3119381&page=1

The_Jazz · 05-02-2007, 06:04 AM

This suit is laughable. I read this article this morning, and I think that this guy has proven the old adage that an attorney that represents himself has a fool for a client. The most interesting thing is that there's been a change in judges in the case because the old one apparently thought the plaintiff was a moron.

The interesting part is that they're trying to return the pants and he won't let them. The new judge should basically dismiss the case on that basis.

Mister Coaster · 05-02-2007, 07:05 AM

This guy is the dictionary definition of a jackass.

I hope the dry cleaners file a countersuit and get back their legal fees.

Ourcrazymodern? · 05-02-2007, 07:26 AM

LOL, I hope if it's true it'll teach us something. Our species seems prone to self-abuse, however, so I doubt that it will.

Bill O'Rights · 05-02-2007, 07:53 AM

Arogant, spiteful, hateful son of a bitch. He needs to be disbarred immediatley, and forced to work at the dry cleaner until he has worked off the Chung's legal expenses. Roy Pearson is the dictionary definition of the word...'Prick'.

I hope he never plans on having another single item dry cleaned, for the rest of his life. Would you accept an article of clothing from this ass wipe at your dry cleaning establishment?

alkaloid · 05-02-2007, 12:57 PM

Yup, this guy definitely passes the asshole test. I wonder what he looks like.

Bill O'Rights · 05-03-2007, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alkaloid

I wonder what he looks like.

stevie667 · 05-03-2007, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill O'Rights

Roy Pearson is the dictionary definition of the word...'Prick'.

You know, i said exactly the same thing on another board.

Val_1 · 05-04-2007, 09:24 AM

On a related note, scientist have estimated that 1.03% of the population suffer from some form of dementia.

Carno · 05-04-2007, 10:46 AM

That few?

The_Jazz · 05-04-2007, 11:06 AM

On a related note, 87.4% of all statistics posted on internet chat boards are pulled directly from the poster's ass.

Val_1, I'm just kidding. Sort of. Actually I agree with Carno that the number seems low given the aging population. Not to mention the Bush administration, but that's another topic.

ShaniFaye · 06-25-2007, 09:50 AM

update

WASHINGTON (AP) -- 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.

http://www.11alive.com/news/article_...?storyid=99143

can I just say.....Im so glad to see this outcome

and for those wanting to know what he looks like

Mister Coaster · 06-25-2007, 10:23 AM

Wow, the justice system actually works... from time to time.

Cynthetiq · 06-25-2007, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShaniFaye

and for those wanting to know what he looks like

wow.... he didn't have Sharpton marching for him and didn't play the race card?

The_Jazz · 06-25-2007, 10:32 AM

Whatyaknow - I was right.

Feels nice to know that I at least appear to know what I'm talking about when it comes to civil courts.

ratbastid · 06-25-2007, 01:45 PM

Next stop: disbarment. Seriously. For a judge to be abusing the system so horribly is just unconscionable.

The_Jazz · 06-25-2007, 01:49 PM

ratbastid - while I never like taking someone's livelyhood away from them, I have to say that I don't disagree with you. If nothing else, his license needs to be suspended for a fairly significant amount of time, i.e. 3+ months, which should effectively take his robes off him.

dksuddeth · 06-25-2007, 02:29 PM

I was under the impression that it shouldn't be that easy to remove a judge?

flstf · 06-25-2007, 05:07 PM

What I don't understand is why the Chungs spent over $100,000 defending themselves. With such a silly lawsuit couldn't they just show up in court and win? Of course with our legal system I guess anything is possible.

tenniels · 06-25-2007, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

Next stop: disbarment. Seriously. For a judge to be abusing the system so horribly is just unconscionable.

Amen to that! When I had first heard of this, I think I threw up a little in my mouth. What a waste of resources and from someone who should by far know better.

shakran · 06-25-2007, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

I was under the impression that it shouldn't be that easy to remove a judge?

Surely you'd agree that insanity would be a valid reason to remove the judge? And I don't think there's a shrink out there who wouldn't think someone bursting into tears over getting the wrong pair of pants, and then thinking that's worth 65 million, is insane.

Cynthetiq · 06-25-2007, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakran

Surely you'd agree that insanity would be a valid reason to remove the judge? And I don't think there's a shrink out there who wouldn't think someone bursting into tears over getting the wrong pair of pants, and then thinking that's worth 65 million, is insane.

the plaintiff was an administrative judge

The_Jazz · 06-25-2007, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

I was under the impression that it shouldn't be that easy to remove a judge?

Apples and oranges - disbarrment and removal from the bench are different things. As I expect you already know.

Hain · 05-03-2008, 04:07 AM

Quote:

View: Judge in pants lawsuit sues to get job back
Source: Edition
created with FASS, the unofficial TFP post generator

Judge in pants lawsuit sues to get job back
May 2, 2008
by Paul Courson

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The former judge who last year lost a multimillion-dollar lawsuit against a dry cleaners over a missing pair of pants wants his job back.
art.cleaners.afp.gi.jpg

Roy Pearson sued the owners of this dry cleaning business for $54 million over a missing pair of pants.

Roy Pearson was not reappointed after his term expired as an administrative law judge in the District of Columbia.

He filed a lawsuit Thursday in federal court accusing city government and others of an "unlawful demotion and subsequent termination."

Pearson was taken off the bench in May 2007, during his unsuccessful $54 million lawsuit against a dry cleaning business, which he accused of failing to meet its promise of "satisfaction guaranteed."

As an administrative law judge, Pearson would hear cases involving zoning law and certain business disputes.

A city panel that decides reappointments had notified Pearson during the controversial lost trousers trial that his status was under review.

A source on that panel said at the time that any judge must meet certain standards of conduct "on and off the bench."

The source, who was among the members of the panel at the time of Pearson's review, said "a judge is a judge 24/7; whether or not they use good judgment in all aspects of their lives is what we can consider."

The civil case, in which Pearson represented himself, sought punitive and compensatory damages against a small family-owned dry cleaners that once posted signs promising "satisfaction guaranteed."

A pair of trousers that hung by the witness stand was a featured part of the trial last summer. The owners testified that the pants belonged to Pearson, who denied under oath that they were his.

The judge found in favor of the dry cleaners and disagreed with Pearson that the satisfaction promise was unconditional. Pearson then lost an appeal filed at D.C. Superior Court, but consideration of his federal appeal has been delayed at his request.

In court documents made available Friday at U.S. District Court in Washington, Pearson, again acting as his own attorney, relies on what he considers Washington's "Whistleblower Protection" law to try to establish illegal retaliation.

The trial over the lost trousers generated a storm of criticism among fairness advocates, who accused Pearson of abusing the system. The latest litigation has begun to produce the same reaction.

"He lost his job because he proved he did not have the legal requirements to fill the job, namely a judicial temperament," said Darren McKinney of the American Tort Reform Association.

Pearson did not return a message left at home.

In his suit seeking to regain his job, he also seeks "compensatory damages in an amount to be determined at trial, in excess of $75,000 from all defendants jointly and severally," as well as an unspecified amount of punitive damages "to be determined at trial."

Efforts to seek reaction from the individuals named in the lawsuit were unsuccessful. No initial hearing date has been set in the civil case assigned to U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan.

Oh holy hell. I just got caught up on this circus. I just can't believe this nonesense. Yes it is terrible that this guy lost his job but I think he went a little over board with this lawsuit.

Court finds missing pants not worth $54M click to show

Quote:

View: Court finds missing pants not worth $54M
Source: Money
created with FASS, the unofficial TFP post generator

Court finds missing pants not worth $54M
June 25 2007
by http://money.cnn.com/

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A judge in the District of Columbia has dismissed a case against a dry cleaner that claimed $54 million in damages for a pair of missing pants.

The case was brought by Roy L. Pearson, himself a judge. He originally sought $67 million from the Chung family, owners of Custom Cleaners. He calculated the amount by estimating years of law violations, adding almost $2 million in common law claims for fraud.

The Chungs denied Pearson's allegations and insisted that the pants they tried to give him were those he had brought in.

The saga began in May 2005, when Pearson took several pairs of pants to Custom Cleaners for alteration as he prepared to start his new job as an administrative law judge. He alleged that he'd brought in a pair of trousers from a blue and maroon suit, but when he came to collect them the Chungs tried to give him a pair of charcoal gray pants that he said were not his.
'Project Runway' for the t-shirt crowd

During a two-day trial earlier this month, Pearson said that when he took the pants to Custom Cleaners, his financial situation was ruinous - he had just been ordered to pay $12,000 in attorney's fees to his ex-wife and his credit cards were at their limit.

Pearson, representing himself during the trial, claimed millions of dollars in attorney fees and millions more in punitive damages for what he called fraudulent advertising under the law.

He also claimed that a sign in the store's window that promised "Satisfaction Guaranteed" was an unconditional warranty that required the defendants to honor any claim by any customer without limitation.

The Chungs' attorney argued that no reasonable person would interpret the signs to mean an unconditional promise of satisfaction. District of Columbia Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff agreed.

In a 23-page conclusion, Bartnoff ruled that Custom Cleaners had not violated the city's Consumer Protection Act. She wrote: "A reasonable consumer would not interpret 'Satisfaction Guaranteed' to mean that a merchant is required to satisfy a customer's unreasonable demands or accede to demands that the merchant has reasonable grounds to dispute."

Pearson had "not met his burden of proving that the pants the defendants attempted to return to him were not the pants he brought in for alteration" she said.

Bartnoff awarded court costs to the defendants. The Chungs - who have spent tens of thousands of dollars on the case - are attempting to have their attorney's fees paid by Pearson.

Their attorney, Chris Manning, said his clients "are relieved that we are past this stage. Judge Bartnoff has spoken loudly in suggesting that, while consumers should be protected, abusive lawsuits like this will not be tolerated. Judge Bartnoff has chosen common sense and reasonableness over irrationality and unbridled venom."

He added: "Hopefully Mr. Pearson doesn't take this any further on appeal, but we expect him to."

During the two-day trial, Soo Chung said that "economically, emotionally and healthwise as well, it has been extremely hard for us." She started the business with her husband after they moved to the United States from South Korea in 1992.

Judge tosses $54 million suit over missing pants click to show

Quote:

View: Judge tosses $54 million suit over missing pants
Source: Edition
created with FASS, the unofficial TFP post generator

Judge tosses $54 million suit over missing pants
June 26, 2007
by http://edition.cnn.com/

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A judge in the District of Columbia has dismissed a case against a dry cleaner who was sued for $54 million in damages over a pair of missing pants.

Roy L. Pearson, an administrative law judge, originally sought $67 million from the Chung family, owners of Custom Cleaners. He claimed they lost a favorite pair of his suit trousers and later tried to give him a pair that were not his.

Custom Cleaners did not violate the city's Consumer Protection Act by failing to live up to Pearson's expectations of the "Satisfaction Guaranteed" sign displayed in the store window, Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff ruled.

Pearson claimed that a sign was an unconditional warranty that required the defendants to honor any claim by any customer without limitation.

He calculated the amount of damages by estimating years of violations, then adding almost $2 million in common-law claims for fraud.

At a news conference in front of Custom Cleaners, Soo Chung said through an interpreter that she was "very pleased" with the verdict, adding that she and her husband have no plans to move back to Korea.

When asked if she would accept Pearson as a future customer, Soo Chung said through her translator, "If he wants to continue to use our services, then yes, they would accept him as a customer."

During the trial, the Chungs denied Pearson's allegations and insisted that the pants were the same pair he brought in to be altered in May 2005.

Pearson represented himself during a two-day trial earlier this month and claimed millions of dollars in attorney fees and millions more in punitive damages for what he claimed was fraudulent advertising.

Pearson said that when he took the pants to Custom Cleaners, his financial situation was ruinous. He had just been ordered to pay $12,000 in attorney's fees to his ex-wife and his credit cards were at their limit.

The Chungs' attorney argued that no reasonable person would interpret the sign to mean an unconditional promise of satisfaction, and Bartnoff agreed.

In a 23-page finding of fact, Bartnoff wrote: "A reasonable consumer would not interpret 'Satisfaction Guaranteed' to mean that a merchant is required to satisfy a customer's unreasonable demands or accede to demands that the merchant has reasonable grounds to dispute."

Pearson had "not met his burden of proving that the pants the defendants attempted to return to him were not the pants he brought in for alteration," the judge concluded.

Bartnoff awarded court costs to the Chungs, who have spent tens of thousands of dollars on the case. They are attempting to have their attorney's fees paid by Pearson.

"Judge Bartnoff has spoken loudly in suggesting that, while consumers should be protected, abusive lawsuits like this will not be tolerated," said the Chungs' attorney, Chris Manning. "Judge Bartnoff has chosen common sense and reasonableness over irrationality and unbridled venom."

Soo Chung said during the trial that "economically, emotionally and healthwise as well, it has been extremely hard for us." She started the business with her husband after they moved to the United States in 1992.

It's not known whether Pearson will appeal the ruling.

Destrox · 05-03-2008, 05:35 AM

I cant say I feel sorry for that douche. He tried to abuse the system and got farked by it.

Too damn bad imo. Just wasting more tax payers money, he should be tossed out on his ass.

lotsofmagnets · 05-04-2008, 12:21 PM

"The civil trial, set for June, has the scope of a John Grisham courtroom thriller and the societal importance of a traffic ticket."

i think that quote from the OP´s source pretty much sums it up. he took a gamble and lost. had he won any of the trials he would never have to work again. ie he´s stupid only for losing.

yellowmac · 05-06-2008, 05:07 PM

I don't feel sorry for him losing his job at all. Who I do feel sorry for are the dry cleaning business owners: hard-working immigrants who had to be dragged into a ridiculous charade. Laws should be made to protect those who have to defend against frivolous lawsuits and to make sure that they are not adversely affected. I haven't heard any updates about the dry cleaning business owners -- last I heard was that there had been a fund set up for them to deal with the legal costs, but that they were still struggling and possibly had to sell or close their business. Truly sad if that's the case.

Martian · 05-06-2008, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yellowmac

I don't feel sorry for him losing his job at all. Who I do feel sorry for are the dry cleaning business owners: hard-working immigrants who had to be dragged into a ridiculous charade. Laws should be made to protect those who have to defend against frivolous lawsuits and to make sure that they are not adversely affected. I haven't heard any updates about the dry cleaning business owners -- last I heard was that there had been a fund set up for them to deal with the legal costs, but that they were still struggling and possibly had to sell or close their business. Truly sad if that's the case.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AP

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.

murp0434 · 05-07-2008, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lotsofmagnets

had he won any of the trials he would never have to work again. ie he´s stupid only for losing.

I completely disagree...I think he's stupid for trying. And it irks me to no end that people continually try to get "easy money" by suing those who have really done nothing wrong for outrageous amounts of money. I'm sorry but it's not McDonald's fault that people are fat, it's not the beer's fault that you're a drunk, and losing a pair of pants is not a $67 million dollar mistake unless those pants were worn by Jesus himself.

Martian · 05-07-2008, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by murp0434

I completely disagree...I think he's stupid for trying. And it irks me to no end that people continually try to get "easy money" by suing those who have really done nothing wrong for outrageous amounts of money. I'm sorry but it's not McDonald's fault that people are fat, it's not the beer's fault that you're a drunk, and losing a pair of pants is not a $67 million dollar mistake unless those pants were worn by Jesus himself.

This is clearly completely off-base.

Everyone knows Jesus didn't wear pants.

The rest is spot-on, which makes the above "completely" a bit inaccurate admittedly.

sapiens · 05-07-2008, 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martian

This is clearly completely off-base.

Everyone knows Jesus didn't wear pants.

The rest is spot-on, which makes the above "completely" a bit inaccurate admittedly.

Any statement about Jesus is bound to overshadow everything else in a post. He tends to do that.

genuinegirly · 05-07-2008, 08:53 PM

Thanks for the update, Augi.

He really shouldn't try to get his job back. This guy just needs to walk away and start a new life in another field.

percy · 10-22-2008, 08:18 AM

Who said, "it ain't over until it's over?"

Surprised the appeal court is going forward. Somehow thought there was a problem with backup in the court system but apparently not.

$54 million missing pants lawsuit back in DC court - Yahoo! Canada News

Poppinjay · 10-22-2008, 08:50 AM

Roy was great to me. It gave a show I produced endless fodder.

The only thing that has annoyed me is that he caused the Chung's to close the location I used to go to. They were very nice people.

genuinegirly · 10-23-2008, 12:37 PM

Wait... this is still going on??!?!! What a mess.

05-02-2007, 06:00 AM	#1 (permalink)
Push-Pull I'll ask when I'm ready.... Location: Firmly in the middle....	The 67 million dollar britches... a lawyer story This is just.....astounding and saddening at the same time. How on earth can this be considered reasonable? I only hope that the judgeship this guy holds is an elected one, then maybe he'll get his come next election. http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=3119381&page=1 __________________ "No laws, no matter how rigidly enforced, can protect a person from their own stupidity." -Me- "Some people are like Slinkies..... They are not really good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs." -Unknown- DAMMIT! -Jack Bauer-

05-02-2007, 06:04 AM	#2 (permalink)
The_Jazz Asshole Administrator Location: Chicago	This suit is laughable. I read this article this morning, and I think that this guy has proven the old adage that an attorney that represents himself has a fool for a client. The most interesting thing is that there's been a change in judges in the case because the old one apparently thought the plaintiff was a moron. The interesting part is that they're trying to return the pants and he won't let them. The new judge should basically dismiss the case on that basis. __________________ "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin "There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush "We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

05-02-2007, 07:05 AM	#3 (permalink)
Mister Coaster Big & Brassy Location: The "Canyon"	This guy is the dictionary definition of a jackass. I hope the dry cleaners file a countersuit and get back their legal fees. __________________ If you have any poo... fling it NOW!

05-02-2007, 07:26 AM	#4 (permalink)
Ourcrazymodern? still, wondering. Location: South Minneapolis, somewhere near the gorgeous gorge	LOL, I hope if it's true it'll teach us something. Our species seems prone to self-abuse, however, so I doubt that it will. __________________ BE JUST AND FEAR NOT

05-02-2007, 07:53 AM	#5 (permalink)
Bill O'Rights will always be an Alyson Hanniganite Location: In the dust of the archives	Arogant, spiteful, hateful son of a bitch. He needs to be disbarred immediatley, and forced to work at the dry cleaner until he has worked off the Chung's legal expenses. Roy Pearson is the dictionary definition of the word...'Prick'. I hope he never plans on having another single item dry cleaned, for the rest of his life. Would you accept an article of clothing from this ass wipe at your dry cleaning establishment? __________________ "I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony "Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.

05-02-2007, 12:57 PM	#6 (permalink)
alkaloid Dead Inside Location: East Coast, USA	Yup, this guy definitely passes the asshole test. I wonder what he looks like.

05-04-2007, 09:24 AM	#9 (permalink)
Val_1 Addict Location: In a State of Denial	On a related note, scientist have estimated that 1.03% of the population suffer from some form of dementia. __________________ I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day. -Frank Sinatra

05-04-2007, 10:46 AM	#10 (permalink)
Carno Junkie	That few? __________________ http://how-to-spell-ridiculous.com/

05-04-2007, 11:06 AM	#11 (permalink)
The_Jazz Asshole Administrator Location: Chicago	On a related note, 87.4% of all statistics posted on internet chat boards are pulled directly from the poster's ass. Val_1, I'm just kidding. Sort of. Actually I agree with Carno that the number seems low given the aging population. Not to mention the Bush administration, but that's another topic. __________________ "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin "There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush "We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

06-25-2007, 09:50 AM	#12 (permalink)
ShaniFaye Submit to me, you know you want to Location: Lilburn, Ga	update WASHINGTON (AP) -- 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. http://www.11alive.com/news/article_...?storyid=99143 can I just say.....Im so glad to see this outcome and for those wanting to know what he looks like __________________ *I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!* Last edited by ShaniFaye; 06-25-2007 at 09:53 AM..

06-25-2007, 10:23 AM	#13 (permalink)
Mister Coaster Big & Brassy Location: The "Canyon"	Wow, the justice system actually works... from time to time. __________________ If you have any poo... fling it NOW!

06-25-2007, 10:32 AM	#15 (permalink)
The_Jazz Asshole Administrator Location: Chicago	Whatyaknow - I was right. Feels nice to know that I at least appear to know what I'm talking about when it comes to civil courts. __________________ "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin "There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush "We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

06-25-2007, 01:45 PM	#16 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	Next stop: disbarment. Seriously. For a judge to be abusing the system so horribly is just unconscionable.

06-25-2007, 01:49 PM	#17 (permalink)
The_Jazz Asshole Administrator Location: Chicago	ratbastid - while I never like taking someone's livelyhood away from them, I have to say that I don't disagree with you. If nothing else, his license needs to be suspended for a fairly significant amount of time, i.e. 3+ months, which should effectively take his robes off him. __________________ "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin "There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush "We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

06-25-2007, 02:29 PM	#18 (permalink)
dksuddeth Junkie Location: bedford, tx	I was under the impression that it shouldn't be that easy to remove a judge? __________________ "no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

06-25-2007, 05:07 PM	#19 (permalink)
flstf Easy Rider Location: Moscow on the Ohio	What I don't understand is why the Chungs spent over $100,000 defending themselves. With such a silly lawsuit couldn't they just show up in court and win? Of course with our legal system I guess anything is possible.

05-03-2008, 05:35 AM	#25 (permalink)
Destrox Metal and Rock 4 Life Location: Phoenix	I cant say I feel sorry for that douche. He tried to abuse the system and got farked by it. Too damn bad imo. Just wasting more tax payers money, he should be tossed out on his ass. __________________ You bore me.... next.

05-04-2008, 12:21 PM	#26 (permalink)
lotsofmagnets Upright Location: reykjavík, iceland	"The civil trial, set for June, has the scope of a John Grisham courtroom thriller and the societal importance of a traffic ticket." i think that quote from the OP´s source pretty much sums it up. he took a gamble and lost. had he won any of the trials he would never have to work again. ie he´s stupid only for losing. __________________ mother nature made the aeroplane, and the submarine sandwich, with the steady hands and dead eye of a remarkable sculptor. she shed her mountain turning training wheels, for the convenience of the moving sidewalk, that delivers the magnetic monkey children through the mouth of impossible calendar clock, into the devil's manhole cauldron. physics of a bicycle, isn't it remarkable?

05-06-2008, 05:07 PM	#27 (permalink)
yellowmac Insane Location: left coast	I don't feel sorry for him losing his job at all. Who I do feel sorry for are the dry cleaning business owners: hard-working immigrants who had to be dragged into a ridiculous charade. Laws should be made to protect those who have to defend against frivolous lawsuits and to make sure that they are not adversely affected. I haven't heard any updates about the dry cleaning business owners -- last I heard was that there had been a fund set up for them to deal with the legal costs, but that they were still struggling and possibly had to sell or close their business. Truly sad if that's the case.

05-07-2008, 08:53 PM	#32 (permalink)
genuinegirly Eat your vegetables Super Moderator Location: Arabidopsis-ville	Thanks for the update, Augi. He really shouldn't try to get his job back. This guy just needs to walk away and start a new life in another field. __________________ "Sometimes I have to remember that things are brought to me for a reason, either for my own lessons or for the benefit of others." Cynthetiq "violence is no more or less real than non-violence." roachboy

10-22-2008, 08:18 AM	#33 (permalink)
percy Addict	Who said, "it ain't over until it's over?" Surprised the appeal court is going forward. Somehow thought there was a problem with backup in the court system but apparently not. $54 million missing pants lawsuit back in DC court - Yahoo! Canada News

10-22-2008, 08:50 AM	#34 (permalink)
Poppinjay You had me at hello Location: DC/Coastal VA	Roy was great to me. It gave a show I produced endless fodder. The only thing that has annoyed me is that he caused the Chung's to close the location I used to go to. They were very nice people. __________________ I think the Apocalypse is happening all around us. We go on eating desserts and watching TV. I know I do. I wish we were more capable of sustained passion and sustained resistance. We should be screaming and what we do is gossip. -Lydia Millet

10-23-2008, 12:37 PM	#35 (permalink)
genuinegirly Eat your vegetables Super Moderator Location: Arabidopsis-ville	Wait... this is still going on??!?!! What a mess. __________________ "Sometimes I have to remember that things are brought to me for a reason, either for my own lessons or for the benefit of others." Cynthetiq "violence is no more or less real than non-violence." roachboy