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
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-44 next last
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)
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...)
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.)
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...)
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)
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)
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.)
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.)
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)
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
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)
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
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.)
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?
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)
To: RDTF
17
posted on
06/25/2007 8:03:50 AM PDT
by
Guenevere
(Duncan Hunter for President, 2008!!)
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".)
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)
To: TigerLikesRooster
Stupid judge thought they should lose their shirts just because they lost his pants?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-44 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson