Plaintiff Who Lost Pants Loses $54 Million Suit Against Dry Cleaner

June 27, 2007

  • June 27, 2007 at 7:57 am
    I will join says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    From the looks of it, there are at least ten of us willing to join in censure this bozo. Hey, maybe Rosie will join in too?

  • June 27, 2007 at 11:36 am
    wudchuck says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    here again, it shows that society has no concern in clogging courts up with something ridiculous. what makes the matter worse, this was a judge/lawyer, whom knows better. he took the situation that was resolved to begin with and made matters worse. i think not only shud he disbarred, but definately repay all legal expenses for the cleaning company had to pay for his stupidity.

  • June 27, 2007 at 12:47 pm
    McCordian says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I agree with Wudchuck. I think Pearson’s actions undermine our legal system, and if I were the judge presiding over the matter, I would’ve undoubtedly sanctioned Pearson for making frivilous (and ridiculous) claims that not only adversely effected the Chungs but burdened the court’s docket.

  • June 27, 2007 at 2:07 am
    DeMoss says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Until actions/penalties are envoked against those who file ridiculous claims and undermining our legal systems, these type of claims will continue to flood our court system. I too would have sanctioned Pearson for making such a frivilous claim. There are more important issues we need to be addressing, NOT a case about lost pants….

  • June 27, 2007 at 2:08 am
    Rich says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    And remember….i t’s 99% of the lawyers that give the rest a bad name!!!

  • June 27, 2007 at 2:11 am
    Power of the People says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I hope the next time there is an election someone steps up and saturates the media with this story – through ads, papers running-mates, and opposition or any other outlet that will bring this idiot to his knees.

    He should be ousted from his position as an abuse of the legal system.

    Too bad they can’t boot him out on his ears now – This is exactly what is wrong with this country

  • June 27, 2007 at 2:21 am
    Ray says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Don’t forget, he was an administrative law judge – not an elected position. Believe it or not, the position is based on merit – and he has just proved that he has no merit.

    Let’s hope that the Chief Administrative Law Judge does not renew his term.

  • June 27, 2007 at 2:28 am
    Get him outta there says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    What an idiot! Not only did he embarass himself, but the entire country in which he currently resides! I applaud the family that welcomes him back after the first time they reimbursed him $150 without a receipt and then this happened! What a MORON!! He has no business being on the bench & his decisions should be reviewed under intense scrutiny! Get him outta there!

  • June 27, 2007 at 2:30 am
    wudchuck says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I AGREE! he shud not get a renewal, and i hope that if he works for a law firm, they consider his attacking the economy for $54 million due to a lost pair of $30-50 pair of pants!….

    UM….maybe he shud work for the company for a year w/o wage since he wanted so much for the missing pants!! LOL!

  • June 27, 2007 at 3:08 am
    Dumb Founded says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I just can not believe that this case actually went to trial. This goes to prove that anyone can file any idiotic claim for any reason and waste every one’s time. That case should have been dismissed upon the filing. This guy should definitely be disbarred – HE HAS NO ETHICS – and afterall isn’t that the main code of law that lawyers must abide by?



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*