June 25, 2007
Judge in Pants Case Rules in Favor of Dry Cleaners
D.C. Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff has ruled in favor of the defendants in the $54 million pants lawsuit. According to the ruling, the plaintiff, administrative law judge Roy Pearson, will get nothing from the defendants, the Chung family, owners of Custom Cleaners. The Chungs will also be awarded costs, and plan to seek compensation for attorneys fees.
Bartnoff found that "nothing in the law supports (the) position" that Pearson took on the issue of the "Satisfaction Guaranteed" sign that had hung inside Custom Cleaners -- Pearson had tried to argue that in the event of a dispute, a dry cleaner must pay the customer whatever the customer claims their item is worth if there is a “Satisfaction Guaranteed” sign in the store, even if the dry cleaner knows the customer is mistaken or lying.
The ruling brings to a close a rather embarrassing trial for the D.C. Superior Court, which found itself at the center of a worldwide media frenzy at the sheer ridiculousness of the lawsuit -- an administrative law judge's claims that he deserved $67 million (later reduced to $54 million) for a pair of misplaced pants. At the close of arguments a little over a week ago, the Chungs' attorney, Chris Matthews Manning, said that should the verdict go their way, he expects Pearson to appeal. We can all only hope he locates enough common sense to choose not to.
The Chungs will hold a brief press conference this afternoon, and we'll update as soon as we hear more about what might happen next. It's been reported on several occasions the experience of this lawsuit has caused the Chung family to want to leave the D.C. area and return to Korea. We hope that today's ruling will go some way in changing their minds. If you'd like the Chungs to know that not all Americans are imbalanced jerks, why not patronize Custom Cleaners in the next week -- your show of support could keep them in business here in the District. Custom Cleaners is located at 3174 1/2 Bladensburg Road NE. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform and the American Tort Reform Association will also co-host a fundraiser open to the public for the Chung family on Tuesday, July 24, 2007 from 6-7:30 p.m. at the US Chamber of Commerce building at 1615 H Street, NW. You can also donate to the Chungs' legal fees at this web site.
For a complete history of the Pearson Pants Proceedings, check out these previous posts on DCist:
*Pants Trial Judge to Give Verdict Next Week
*Pearson Pants Trial Standing-Room Only
*Pearson Headlines a Real Kick in the Pants
*Judge Pearson Breaks Down on Stand
*$65 Million Pants Judge Could Still Keep His Job
*D.C. Judge Seeks $67 Million for Lost Pants
|
This is absolutely sick. I feel for the small business owner who has to brake the bank to defend against this malicious harassment.
THANK GOD THIS NIGHTMARE IS OVER!!! What a waste the last two years have been for the Chung family. Hopefully now they're lives can get back to being somewhat normal again. As for Pearson, I hope that this sad pitiful little man gets a taste of his own medicine.
Thank God this is over and we can all go back to focusing our collective hatred on Marion Barry instead of some no-name judge.
this is a travesty of justice! i'll never feel safe taking my wool pants to the dry cleaner again.
Does anyone know how to get an actual copy of the Judge's opinion? (seriously)
The Chung's lawyer is Chris Manning, a talented attorney and an excellent defender on my soccer team, not an anachronistic gasbag of a talkshow host (i.e., Chris Matthews).
How long before Roy Pearson loses his job as "judge?" Taxpayer money was already wasted on this trial. It shouldn't continue to be wasted on his salary.
This can't bode well for the plaintiffs in the consumer protection suits arising out of the movie, "The Never Ending Story. . . ."
Ryan, it's on NBC4.com
Non-sequitor--I am so sick of seeing that chick's cheeks in that American Apparel ad.
Our long national nightmare is over.
Thanks MikeO, I must have had Hardball on the brain when I was typing that one.
xaos - Thanks!
I agree Gavin -- those American Apparel adverts are trying too hard. They're annoying; decidedly un-hip.