Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dry Cleaner Wins Missing Pants Case (D.C. judge loses $54 million suit)
Del Rio News Herald ^ | 06/25/07 | LUBNA TAKRURI

Posted on 06/25/2007 7:54:06 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster

Jun 25, 10:40 AM EDT

Dry Cleaner Wins Missing Pants Case

By LUBNA TAKRURI
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- 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.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: 54million; drycleaner; korea; lawsuit; pants; pantsuit; roypearson; ruling; suitpants; tlr
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-44 next last

1 posted on 06/25/2007 7:54:11 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

The jerk needs to be disbarred too.


2 posted on 06/25/2007 7:55:40 AM PDT by Jaded ("I have a mustard- seed; and I am not afraid to use it."- Joseph Ratzinger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
and overshadowed the drunken driving trial of former Mayor Marion Barry.

Well that's just so passe', anymore.
3 posted on 06/25/2007 7:56:33 AM PDT by true_blue_texican (...against all enemies, foreign and domestic...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Hot diggity dog!!! Woooohooooooooo, the Chungs should counter sue for legal bills and mental anguish.............


4 posted on 06/25/2007 7:56:44 AM PDT by rockabyebaby (HEY JORGE, SHUT UP AND BUILD THE BLEEPING FENCE, ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jaded

He also need to pay the Chungs for legal fees and emotional distress. And he should be tarred and feathered.


5 posted on 06/25/2007 7:57:20 AM PDT by true_blue_texican (...against all enemies, foreign and domestic...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

The Pants in Question

Jin Chung, left, with his legal team Chris Manning, and Mendi Sossamon, display the contentious pair of pants while delivering a statement to the media after the first day of Jin and Soo Chung's trial in Washington on Tuesday, June 12, 2007. The Chungs are being sued by DC judge Roy Pearson for 54 million dollars for what he calls 'mis-leading signage' at their dry-cleaning business. Sossamon is holding a bag with a pair of pants that were part of the original suit. The part of the suit involving the alleged loss of those pants has since been dropped. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)


6 posted on 06/25/2007 7:57:34 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster (kim jong-il, chia head, ppogri, In Grim Reaper we trust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

And “Judge” Pearson has to pay the defendants’ legal bills. This so rocks.


7 posted on 06/25/2007 7:57:49 AM PDT by 3AngelaD (They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

I’m surprised the ruling Judge didn’t verbally dope-slap the judge who brought the suit for wasting everybody’s time.


8 posted on 06/25/2007 7:58:29 AM PDT by theDentist (Qwerty ergo typo : I type, therefore I misspelll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: true_blue_texican
and overshadowed the drunken driving trial of former Mayor Marion Barry.

Well that's just so passe', anymore.

Like Marion Barry driving drunk is even news.

9 posted on 06/25/2007 7:58:33 AM PDT by The_Victor (If all I want is a warm feeling, I should just wet my pants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
"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.

Good, the whiny judge gets to pay costs. The dry cleaners should sue him for defamation and anything else they can think of. He should be disbarred (or was he simply elected with no experience?) for wasting the court's time.

10 posted on 06/25/2007 7:59:03 AM PDT by mtbopfuyn (I think the border is kind of an artificial barrier - San Antonio councilwoman Patti Radle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

“Judge Judy ordered Pearson to pay the court costs of the defendants..”....Justice.


11 posted on 06/25/2007 7:59:39 AM PDT by constant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
"Bartnoff ordered Pearson to pay the court costs of defendants Soo Chung, Jin Nam Chung and Ki Y. Chung."

This POS should have to pay their lawyer fees too.

That would cut down on frivolous lawsuits if the one who brought the lawsuit lost their case, they had to pay for the defendants lawyers and time lost.

12 posted on 06/25/2007 8:00:06 AM PDT by libs_kma (www.imwithfred.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
"And “Judge” Pearson has to pay the defendants’ legal bills. This so rocks."

Not correct. An order to pay "costs" does not include attorney fees. It looks like each side has to pay their own attorney fees.

13 posted on 06/25/2007 8:00:26 AM PDT by joebuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster; Kaslin

I hope youse guys wern’t just sitting around waiting for this verdict to come in. ;-)


14 posted on 06/25/2007 8:00:50 AM PDT by Nasty McPhilthy (Those who beat their swords into plow shears will plow for those who don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

“a pair of pants that were part of the original suit”

I wonder if he got two pairs of pants with that suit?


15 posted on 06/25/2007 8:01:57 AM PDT by ShasheMac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

there is some sanity in DC after all


16 posted on 06/25/2007 8:02:08 AM PDT by RDTF (www.imwithfred.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RDTF

GOod job!


17 posted on 06/25/2007 8:03:50 AM PDT by Guenevere (Duncan Hunter for President, 2008!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
...and overshadowed the drunken driving trial of former Mayor Marion Barry.

Which "bitch set him up" this time?

18 posted on 06/25/2007 8:07:20 AM PDT by PBRSTREETGANG (Apparently now my party considers me an "ugly nativist".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joebuck

So I guess they will have to sue him to recover their attorneys’ fees.


19 posted on 06/25/2007 8:07:40 AM PDT by 3AngelaD (They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Stupid judge thought they should lose their shirts just because they lost his pants?


20 posted on 06/25/2007 8:08:30 AM PDT by VRWCmember
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-44 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson