Sources: Judge in $54M Pants Case to Lose Job

readexpress.com/ ^ | 10/23/07 | The Post's Keith L. Alexander

[paltz]

AN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE who drew national attention for his $54 million lawsuit against a local dry cleaner could soon be getting his ticket to unemployment.

A city commission on Monday voted against reappointing Roy L. Pearson Jr. to sit on bench at the Office of Administrative Hearings, a court that rules on cases involving D.C. agencies, The Post's Keith L. Alexander reports.

[Attention Surplus Disorder]

Did he ever get his pants back? Enquiring minds and all that.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Justice is served.........

[moonman]

He lost his pants

[Joe Boucher]

This Bozo should be digging ditches.

[Shermy]

When is his commitment hearing scheduled for?

[Sgt_Schultze]

I bet he sues because he wasn’t rehired.

[Sunshine Sister]

Good. That dolt doesn’t belong on the bench!

[AU72]

He sued his own pants off.

[Dumpster Baby]

He claimed these pants weren't his, and that's not what he was after anyway.

[i_dont_chat]

The attorney who represented the judge should be tar’d and feather’d. A public shunning would be nice.

Legal abuse us costly and harmful.

[Types_with_Fist]

Good.

[Doomonyou]

The attorney who represented the judge should be tar’d and feather’d. A public shunning would be nice.

I believe the moron represented his own bad self.

[MediaMole]

If he sued for $54 million over a pair of pants, he’s going to sue for $54 trillion, trillion over this.

[vetsvette]

Not to worry, Hillary will hire him for her campaign and, then, as Attorney General.

[Attention Surplus Disorder]

Gee, if he lost the case and he lost his pants, do you think he’s em-bare-assed?

[CaptainK]

What about the judge who allowed this to go forward. Shouldn’t he be bounced?

[KevinB]

He should also be disbarred, not that I really think that’s going to happen in the third-world country known as the District of Columbia.

[Safetgiver]

Disbarrment isn’t in the picture. We had a judge here in Berks Co. that ran up extraordinary bills on his credit cards (sons college tuition, lunches, cars, etc.) then went bankrupt around the time he retired. Courts couldn’t take his mansion because it was in his AND his wife’s name. If anything is owned by TWO the other isn’t responsible. The cards were in ONE name, so he is the only one responsible. Case closed. Now, don’t you think he knew this? Do credit companies downgrade these lowlife’s credit rating? Just the system working for the lawyers.

[Hacklehead]

Lost his pants, lost his mind, lost his case, lost his job. It’s been a rough year.