|
Perceptions OF america's JUSTICE SYSTEM
He's Baaa-ck Part II -- News & Views 2008

About Roy L. Pearson, Jr.
Roy L.
Pearson, Jr. News & Views 2007
54
Million Dollar Pants on Trial

Frivolous Lawsuit Remedies
By: Victims-of-Law

Judge Judith Bartnoff's Verdict
Decision in Pearson v. Chung 05 CA 4302
[84KB]
-- 2007
Judgment
in Pearson v. Chung 05 CA 4302 [18KB]
-- 2007
He's Baaa-ack Part II -- News & Views 2008
May 2008
Pants Suit' Judge Suing for Job, $1M in Damages
The Associated Press
5-6-08 --
A former judge who lost a $54 million law suit against a
dry cleaners over a missing pair of pants is suing to
get his job back and at least $1 million in damages. . .
. In the suit filed in federal court, Roy Pearson he was
wrongfully dismissed for exposing corruption within the
Office of Administrative Hearings, the department where
he worked. In court documents, Pearson said he was
protected as a whistle-blower and that the city used the
fact that he was being "vilified in the media" to cut
him out of his job. . . . In a response to a Freedom of
Information Act request from The Associated Press, the
city's general counsel wrote that Pearson's term as an
administrative law judge expired in May 2007, and the
D.C. Commission on Selection and Tenure of
Administrative Law Judges voted not to reappoint him.
About Roy L. Pearson, Jr.
. . .

|

Roy L. Pearson, Jr. |
He
is an African American
lawyer and administrative law judge in Washington, D.C. His undergraduate degree
was earned at Lake Forest College and his J.D.
at Northwestern University School of Law. Upon
graduation, he first taught at, then became assistant
director of, the clinical program at the Georgetown
University Law Center. Pearson passed the bar for the
District of Columbia in 1978 and bar for the U.S.
Supreme Court in 1985.
From 1978 to 2002,
Pearson was the attorney for the Washington Neighborhood
Legal Services Program, serving as the Assistant
Director for Legal Operations from 1989 onwards.
From 2003 to 2005, he was
a contract hearing examiner for the Office of Police
Complaints, and on May 2, 2005, Pearson was appointed as
an administrative law judge for Washington D.C.
Pearson has been on the
board, or served as counsel for numerous Washington D.C. community organizations,
including the Columbia Heights Youth Club, Fort Lincoln
Civic Association, Black Seeds, Inc. Washington Council
of Lawyers and the National Council of Black Lawyers.
Pearson has became famous
(infamous) for suing a small dry cleaning service for
$65,462,500, alleging it lost a pair of his pants.
Previously the cleaners had offered $12,000 to settle
the complaint.
At
one point,
D.C. Superior Court Judge
Neal Kravitz stated that "the court has significant
concerns that the plaintiff is acting in bad faith."
However, he didn't do anything to give relief to the
defendants.
Pearson has a litigation history; commenter Monica
points to
this reported opinion stemming from his divorce.
Appellate Court opined
when upholding legal fees awarded to Pearson’s ex-wife:
The trial court made specific findings concerning the
award of attorney's fees, including that the litigation
was disproportionately long despite the relative
simplicity of the case and that husband "in good part
is responsible for excessive driving up of everything
that went on here including threatening both the wife
and her lawyer with disbarment as a member of both
the D.C. bar and Virginia bar," which created
"unnecessary litigation." Accordingly, we cannot say
the trial court abused its discretion in awarding
attorney's fees to wife.”
The 67 Million Dollar Pair of Pants
Video on YouTube
Click to read the Joint Pretrial Statement in the
$65,000,000 dry cleaners lawsuit.
Pearson, Roy L Jr
3012 Pineview Ct NE
Washington, DC 20018-1617
(202) 269-1191
Email:
roypearsonjr@verizon.net
Roy L. Pearson, Jr.
News & Views 2007
Click headline
for full article
DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA
November 2007
D.C. Officials Confirm Removal of Judge Who Brought $54
Million Pants Lawsuit
The Associated Press
11-14-07 --
A judge who lost a $54 million lawsuit against his dry
cleaner over a pair of missing pants has lost his job,
District of Columbia officials confirmed. . . . Roy
Pearson's term as an administrative law judge expired
May 2 and the D.C. Commission on Selection and Tenure of
Administrative Law Judges has voted not to reappoint
him, Lisa Coleman, the city's general counsel, wrote
Nov. 8 in response to a Freedom of Information Act
request from The Associated Press. . . . Pearson was one
of about 30 judges who worked in the Office of
Administrative Hearings, which handles disputes
involving city agencies. He had held his position for
two years. . . . The Washington Post and The
(Washington) Examiner, citing sources familiar with the
case, reported the commission's decision last month.
Coleman refused to release a copy of a letter to Pearson
informing him of the decision, saying it is considered a
personnel matter. . . . Pearson's lawsuit in D.C.
Superior Court claimed that Custom Cleaners, owned by
South Korean immigrants, did not live up to Pearson's
expectations of "Satisfaction Guaranteed," as advertised
in store windows.

October 2007
Judge Who Lost Pant Suit Loses Job
By Keith L. Alexander,
Washington Post Staff Writer
Roy L. Pearson Jr., the
administrative law judge who lost his $54 million
lawsuit against a Northeast Washington dry cleaner, lost
his job yesterday and was ordered to vacate his office,
sources said. . . . Pearson, 57, who had served as a
judge for two years, was up for a 10-year term at the
Office of Administrative Hearings, but a judicial
committee last week voted against reappointing him. . .
. The panel had a seven-page letter hand-delivered to
Pearson about 3:30 p.m., directing him to leave his
office by 5 p.m. Pearson's term ended in May, at the
height of his battle with the dry cleaners. Since then,
he has remained on the payroll, making $100,000 a year
as an attorney adviser. . . . A source familiar with the
committee's meetings said Pearson's lawsuit played
little role in the decision not to reappoint him. . . .
Instead, the committee said it had reviewed Pearson's
judicial decisions and audiotapes of proceedings over
which he had presided and found he did not demonstrate
"appropriate judgment and judicial temperament,"
according a source who spoke on condition of anonymity
because of the sensitive nature of the case. . . .
Sources said Pearson also was criticized for displaying
a "combative" nature with supervisors and colleagues and
for failing to comply with policies in drafting
opinions. . . . Administrative law judges hear cases
involving city agencies and commissions.
Judge Set to Lose Job, Sources Say
Panel Reportedly Votes
Against Reappointment
By Keith L. Alexander,
Washington Post Staff Writer
10-24-07 --
Roy L. Pearson
Jr., whose $54 million lawsuit against a Northeast
Washington dry-cleaning shop was rejected in court, is
about to lose his job as an administrative law judge,
sources said last night. . . . A city commission voted
yesterday against reappointing Pearson to the bench of
the Office of Administrative Hearings, which hears cases
involving various D.C. boards and agencies. Pearson, who
was up for a 10-year term, had tried to hold on to the
job. . . . The commission's discussions are not public.
Sources familiar with the deliberations said the panel
hasn't drafted a letter formally notifying Pearson of
its decision. Until that is done, the sources said, the
decision is not final. The letter could be sent early
next week, according to the sources, who spoke on the
condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature
of the case. . . . The Commission on Selection and
Tenure of Administrative Law Judges first notified
Pearson in August that it might not reappoint him,
several weeks after he lost his civil suit against the
dry cleaners. Yesterday's vote came after months of
discussions, including two recent hearings in which
Pearson defended his two-year record on the bench.
Why Does the Pants Judge Still Have His Job?
DCist
10-10-07 --
Just when we has stopped thinking
about Judge Roy Pearson and his humiliating $54 million pants
law suit for a second, the Examiner steps forward to ask the
most important question of all: Why on Earth is Pearson still
collecting a paycheck? . . . At the beginning of August, the
panel that will ultimately decide Pearson's fate sent the
beleaguered judge a letter letting him know his job was in
jeopardy, but stopped short of actually firing him. At the time,
they indicated they would make a final decision in about a week.
That was two months ago. . . . Scott McCabe at the Examiner says
the the panel still needs to hold a meeting to give Pearson one
last chance to argue his case for keeping his job, which pays
him $100,000 a year and would last for a 10-year term should he
be reappointed. If such a hearing has even been scheduled,
officials are refusing to reveal the date to reporters. . . .
Isn't it time to call shenanigans on these guys? We know it's
difficult to fire a judge, but what's the hold up with even
holding the necessary hearing?

September
2007
Targets of Judge's $54 Million Suit Over a Pair of Pants Calling
It Quits
New
York Lawyer, By The Associated Press
9-20-07 --
The owners of a dry cleaner who
were sued for $54 million over a missing pair of pants have
closed and sold the business involved in the dispute. . . . The
Chungs' attorney, Chris Manning, is citing a loss of revenue for
Custom Cleaners and the emotional toll of defending the lawsuit.
. . . The trouble began in 2005 after a pair of pants the
plaintiff brought to the cleaners in Northeast Washington went
missing. But a week later, the Chungs said the pants had been
found. Roy Pearson, an administrative law judge, said those were
not his pants and decided to sue. . . . The lawsuit originally
demanded $67 million but was reduced to $54 million. A judge
rejected it in June. . . . Manning said the Chungs have closed
two of their three dry cleaning businesses since the lawsuit
began.
August
2007
Agency Employing Pants Judge to be Reviewed
DCist
8-22-07 --Roy
Pearson, the famed Pants Judge, has just under a week to
respond to the letter he received from his employers
earlier this month informing him that his job was in
jeopardy. Knowing Pearson as we now do, it seems likely
the Office of Administrative Hearings, which has
employed him as an administrative law judge for the
District (Pearson is currently serving as an attorney
adviser to the OAH while his contract is under review,
but is still on payroll), will receive a zealously
argued, impassioned plea from the judge stating why he
should be able to keep his job. But while the OAH waits
for his response, they'll have other matters to deal
with:
The Examiner reports
they're the subject of a thorough review by the The D.C.
Inspector General.
Judge Says Cleaners' Bid Not Frivolous
By Henri E. Cauvin,
Washington Post Staff Writer
8-17-07 --The
judge who sent Roy Pearson packing gave him a final
sendoff yesterday. . . . In a written order, D.C.
Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff offered her take on
the efforts by the Northeast Washington dry cleaners to
collect attorneys' fees stemming from Pearson's failed
lawsuit over a pair of pants. They were hardly
frivolous, as Pearson had claimed, she said. . . .
Ordinarily, awarding attorneys' fees against a consumer
plaintiff such as Pearson would be unusual, Bartnoff
said. . . . "But this is an unusual case, in which the
plaintiff attempted to take what was at best a
misunderstanding about one pair of pants and expand it
to a claim of $67 million, based on legal theories that
-- once they clearly were articulated -- were
unsupported in fact or in law," the judge said. . . . On
Monday, in a bid to bring the case to an end, the owners
of Custom Cleaners withdrew their demand for attorneys'
fees and asked Pearson to forgo his plans to appeal the
verdict against him.
D.C. Judge Files Appeal Over Missing Pants
Brendan Smith, Legal Times
8-15-07 --
D.C. administrative law judge Roy
Pearson Jr. won't give up after losing his $54 million lawsuit
against a local dry cleaner over a missing pair of pants. . . .
Pearson filed an appeal Tuesday with the D.C. Court of Appeals,
although the Chung family on Monday withdrew its motion seeking
to compel Pearson to pay more than $82,000 in attorney fees. The
Chungs have raised close to $100,000 through fundraisers and
donations to help cover their legal fees and business losses
after international media attention focusing on the case. . . .
Pearson is soldiering on after losing a two-day bench trial in
June where he wept over his missing pants, which he'd had
altered because he gained weight while he was unemployed before
becoming an administrative law judge in 2005. . . . Chris
Manning, the Chungs' attorney, released a statement Tuesday:
"The Chungs have done everything possible to put this nightmare
behind them and return to their normal lives. They have won
resoundingly at trial, raised donations from gracious private
donors to pay for their litigation costs, let Mr. Pearson off
the hook for personally paying their expenses and extended an
olive branch to Mr. Pearson in hopes that he would end this
matter and not appeal." . . . Manning added that Pearson has
chosen "desperate irrationality over common sense and decided to
appeal, unnecessarily costing the parties more wasted time and
the D.C. taxpayers more wasted money."
Pearson to Appeal Pants Verdict
By Henri E. Cauvin,
Washington Post Staff Writer
8-14-07 --
A day after the dry
cleaners he sued tried to make peace, D.C.
Administrative Law Judge Roy Pearson filed official
notice today that he plans to appeal the verdict against
him to the District's highest court. . . . The owners of
Custom Cleaners in Northeast Washington had hoped to
head off Pearson by filing court papers withdrawing
their demand for tens of thousands of dollars in
attorneys fees and prevailing on him to let the case
lie. . . . But today, a day before the deadline for
filing his notice of appeal, Pearson -- whose $54
million suit arose from a dispute over a pair of pants
that he claimed went missing -- submitted the requisite
paperwork to the D.C. Superior Court. . . . So, for now
at least, the case of Pearson v. Chung will remain
alive, sustained by a two-page filing and a $100 fee.
The filing doesn't guarantee Pearson will follow
through. The case could be settled before either side
ever finalizes its filings and long before arguments in
court.
Dry Cleaners Cut Plaintiff Some Slack
By Henri E. Cauvin,
Washington Post Staff Writer
8-14-07 --
The dry cleaners aren't
pressing their case against the Pants Judge. . . . In a
surprise turn yesterday, the small-business owners sued
by D.C. Administrative Law Judge Roy Pearson withdrew
their demand that he pay nearly $83,000 for their legal
bills, saying that enough money had been raised from
supporters to cover the expenses and that they want to
end the fighting. . .. The cleaners want Pearson, who
could soon be out of a job, to do the same. . .. In the
motion filed in D.C. Superior Court, the owners of
Custom Cleaners ask Pearson, who lost his famous $54
million lawsuit two months ago, to call a halt to the
legal proceedings. If he intends to appeal a judge's
rejection of his lawsuit over a supposedly missing pair
of pants, he has until tomorrow to file notice. . . .
"With their losses and expenses now almost completely
recouped, all Defendants want to do is make this case go
away," Christopher Manning, an attorney for Soo Chung
and her family, wrote in the seven-page motion.
"Defendants' lives have been devastated and they want
nothing more than to quietly return to running their dry
cleaning business."

Judge Tries to Avoid Paying Legal Bills Of Cleaners He
Sued Over Missing Pants
By Henri E. Cauvin,
Washington Post Staff Writer
8-13-07 --
The Pants Judge wants to keep the dry cleaners he sued
out of his pockets. . . . In a filing in D.C. Superior
Court, Administrative Law Judge Roy Pearson said he
should not be forced to pay legal fees to the dry
cleaners he sued over a missing pair of pants. . . . A
case that took nearly two weeks to decide could hardly
be considered frivolous, Pearson said in a 65-page
brief. The trial judge's written verdict did not take
such a charitable view of Pearson's case, dismissing his
allegations outright. . . . An order that Pearson pay
attorney fees would be unusual, but the case against
Custom Cleaners, a family-owned business on Bladensburg
Road NE, was about as odd as they come.
Judge Who Sued Over Lost Pants May Now Lose
Reappointment
Brendan Smith, Legal
Times
8-6-07 --
Administrative Law Judge Roy Pearson Jr. became the
poster boy for frivolous lawsuits with his unsuccessful
$54 million lawsuit against a dry cleaner over a lost
pair of pants. But questions about his temperament and
demeanor as an administrative law judge had surfaced
long before a media firestorm engulfed him this year. .
. . Since his initial two-year term expired in May,
Pearson has been sidelined from the bench and is still
earning his $100,512 salary working as an attorney
adviser at the D.C. Office of Administrative Hearings. A
commission that reappoints administrative law judges at
the OAH is expected to vote today on the first step
toward denying his appointment to a full 10-year term. .
. . Chief Administrative Law Judge Tyrone Butler has
complicated that process by offering shifting
recommendations of neutral, positive, and finally
negative about Pearson's reappointment, according to
internal documents obtained by Legal Times. . . . Given
their history, it's hard to imagine why Butler would
have anything positive to say about Pearson. Less than
three months after starting work in May 2005, Pearson
sent a 14-page letter to then-Mayor Anthony Williams
urging him "to inquire into whether corrupt ethics,
demonstrably poor judgment and failed leadership
constitute 'good cause' to remove Chief Judge Butler."
Commission Weighs Future of Litigious Judge
By Raw Fisherfrom Marc
Fisher's Blog
8-3-07 --
By the middle of next
week, Roy Pearson, the D.C. administrative law judge who
sued his neighborhood dry cleaners for $54 million and
lost, will receive a letter that starts the process that
could put him out of a job. . . . City sources said a
marathon meeting of the Commission on Selection and
Tenure of Administrative Law Judges ended late Monday
with agreement to meet again next week to finalize
wording of a letter explaining the panel's doubts about
granting Pearson a 10-year term on the bench. Pearson's
initial term expired at the end of April, at the height
of his legal battle against the Chung family, owners of
Custom Cleaners on Bladensburg Road NE.
July
2007
Judge won’t reconsider $54 million pants suit
But man who sued D.C. dry
cleaner for lost garment is expected to press on
NBC News and news
services
A customer who sued his
dry cleaner for $54 million over a missing pair of pants
has been denied in his efforts to get the judge in the
widely mocked case to reconsider her decision. . . . Roy
L. Pearson, a local administrative law judge, argued
last week that District of Columbia Superior Court Judge
Judith Bartnoff failed to address his legal claims.
Bartnoff had ruled that the business owners did not
violate the city's consumer protection law by failing to
live up to his expectations of a "Satisfaction
Guaranteed" sign once displayed in the store. . . .
Pearson's motion for reconsideration was turned down
after Bartnoff found that he had not "presented any new
argument or authority that warrants reconsideration of
the Court's prior ruling," NBC reported Thursday.
Pants Suit Plaintiff Asks Judge to Reconsider
By Bill Miller,
Washington Post Staff Writer
7-13-07 --
Roy Pearson isn't giving up
his legal battle against the dry cleaning business he
claims lost his pants. Late last night he asked the
judge who ruled against him to reconsider his $54
million lawsuit. . . . Pearson filed court papers urging
D.C. Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff to take
another look at his case against Custom Cleaners.
Bartnoff
rejected the claims
in a ruling June 25 , saying Pearson had not shown that
the Northeast Washington shop violated the city's
consumer protection laws.
Couple Asks Judge To Order Plaintiff To Pay Legal Fees
By Henri E. Cauvin,
Washington Post Staff Writer
7-9-07 --
A dry cleaning
business is turning the tables on a man who
unsuccessfully sued the firm for $54 million, asking a
judge to order him to cover $83,000 in legal fees. . . .
The motion, filed in D.C. Superior Court, comes less
than two weeks after a judge denied Roy Pearson's claim
over a pair of pants that allegedly went astray. Pearson
accused Custom Cleaners of failing to honor the
"Satisfaction Guaranteed" sign posted at the shop. . . .
Attorneys for the business's owners, Soo and Jin Chung,
wrote that Pearson, an administrative law judge,
conducted himself in an outrageous manner since the
dispute began in spring 2005. . . . "From his outrageous
demands for compensation . . . to his amazingly
voluminous discovery and motions practice to his
unconscionable continual disregard for the Court's
Orders, Plaintiff's motives have been clear -- quite
simply, to harass Defendants and to attempt to utterly
destroy their lives," attorney Christopher Manning
wrote. . . . As a lawyer and an administrative law
judge, Pearson should have known better, Manning said. .
. . "Instead of honoring our judicial system, the
plaintiff decided to use his intimate knowledge (and
unreasonable interpretations) of District of Columbia
laws to harass and exploit hard working South Korean
immigrants who work in excess of 70 hours a week to live
the American dream," he wrote. . . . Now Pearson must
face consequences, Manning said, adding, "Simply put,
Defendants ask the Court to compensate the parties who
have truly suffered throughout this bizarre odyssey --
the Chungs."

He's baaaa-ack:
The $54 Million Pants Suit That Won't Die
By Mark Fisher
7-6-07 --
Roy Pearson, the
D.C. administrative law judge who filed, fought and lost
a $54 million lawsuit against the Korean immigrants who
own his neighborhood dry cleaners, chose the Fourth of
July holiday to make it clear that he will not be going
away. . . . Despite a clear finding by D.C. Superior
Court Judge Judith Bartnoff that
Pearson's case against Custom Cleaners had no merit
and that the cleaners'
possible misplacing of a pair of Pearson's pants was
not worth a penny
to the plaintiff, Pearson is back. He wrote to defense
lawyer Christopher Manning this week to let the Chung
family know that Pearson plans to file today a motion
arguing that Bartnoff failed to address Pearson's legal
claims and asking the judge to reverse her verdict in
the case. . . . Manning, who has said that the Chungs
have already been wiped out financially by the need to
defend themselves against Pearson's
two-year legal jihad,
responded to Pearson by asking that he end the misery
for the Chungs, who face legal bills of more than
$100,000. Manning asked Pearson to consider moving on,
for the Chungs' sake and for his own.
A kick in the pants
Maybe the missing-trousers case
was so compelling because it was more than just another
frivolous lawsuit.
LA
Times Editorial
7-4-07 -- A JUDICIAL DECISION in Washington
last week reverberated not just across the United States but
throughout the world. We're referring not to the Supreme Court's
decision on racial integration in public schools but to a ruling
by the heretofore obscure D.C. Superior Court Judge Judith
Bartnoff. . . . Bartnoff is the judge who ruled against Roy L.
Pearson, a sort-of colleague (he's an administrative law judge)
who had gone to court demanding $67 million — later reduced to
$54 million — from a dry cleaner he claimed had lost a pair of
his trousers. From Ireland to China to Australia, newspapers
editorialized about Pearson's comeuppance. The glee was
bipartisan and cross-ideological. The conservative Washington
Times lavished praise on Bartnoff even though, as it noted, she
was a Clinton appointee.
Frivolous Lawsuit Remedies
Victims-of-Law Commentary
6-30-07 --
There are court
rules, state and federal statutes not to mention an
abundance of case law allowing judges to dismiss
frivolous law suits shortly after they are filed. We
should not overlook the fact the DC judges handling this
case permitted it to go out of control resulting in
outrageous legal fees for the Chungs.
There are a number of
groups that want to enact ‘tort reform’ and are using
this case as the “poster child” for a “flawed
legal system ravaged by greedy trial lawyers.”
While it was not
surprising that Judge Bartnoff awarded court costs to
the defendants (it became a high profile case), it’s a
drop in the bucket compared to what the Chungs had to
suffer emotionally and monetarily in our “flawed
legal system.” It is the system itself that caused
this case to drag on for almost two years. Was it
because the plaintiff was an attorney and a DC
administrative law judge? We think that may have had a
lot to do with it.
It’s a well known fact
that non-attorney Pro-se cases get little attention from
judges no matter how meritorious. It’s thrown out either
through a summary judgment procedure or as a frivolous
suit with almost no hesitation.
The only ones who know
the truth are those that have seen hundreds of cases
thrown out and read the judicial decisions that were
rive with falsehoods or outright distortions and
generally lack mention of the actual allegations.
Yes, our flawed legal
system needs to be changed, but not by ramming more
laws down the throats of the citizenry. The people only
want attorneys and judges to actually adhere to the
“rule of law” as written, including obeying the state
and federal constitutions and statutes as well as rules
of court and evidence. It's the only fair way.
In the end the Chungs may
prevail but at what price? One only has to recall the
Duke case in North Carolina. Three young men had their
lives ruined and the emotional and monetary damages went
totally out of control. Unfortunately, this is a lot
more common than the average person realizes.
No one
should be "above the law."
Attorneys fees still climbing for Chungs
by John O'Brien
6-27-07 --
A litigation nightmare ended in a dream ruling for Jin
and Soo Chung. Now there's the matter of the bill. . . .
The Chungs were awarded court costs and ordered to pay
nothing by Washington D.C. Superior Court Judge Judith
Bartnoff, but the Korean couple who was sued for $54
million for misplacing a pair of pants still has a
six-figure bill with attorney Chris Manning of Manning &
Sossamon. . . . A possible appeal might push the tab
even higher for the Chungs, who have considered moving
back to South Korea. . . . "I think the likelihood of
appeal is very high," Manning said. "Mr. Pearson has
said as much on numerous occasions."
Pants Verdict: Judge Stuffs The Pants Man
By: Marc Fisher
In an extremely cautious
and detailed ruling, D.C. Superior Court Judge Judith
Bartnoff this morning said that Administrative Law Judge
Roy Pearson deserves not a penny of the $67 million that
he once demanded in compensation for a mixup at his
neighborhood dry cleaners. . . . But astonishingly,
Bartnoff said not a word in her decision about Pearson's
handling of the case, or about the size of his demand,
or about the bizarre scale of his legal assault on the
immigrant family who own Custom Cleaners on Bladensburg
Road NE. . . . Perhaps the judge didn't need to: She
spoke with her actions instead, awarding the Chung
family the costs of the case--an unusual move in a civil
case in which each side would ordinarily be expected to
pay their own costs. (But awarding costs is not the same
as awarding attorney's fees--the big financial blow in
any legal matter--and Judge Bartnoff said she would make
that decision at a later date.) The Chungs were laid low
by Pearson's two-year pursuit of the case; their legal
fees wiped out their savings and forced them to consider
moving back to their native land of South Korea. In addition, as
the Chungs' lawyer, Christopher Manning, pointed out
this morning, the Chungs still face the potentially
enormous and almost certain costs of defending
themselves against an almost-inevitable appeal of
Bartnoff's decision by Pearson.
Why Judge Pearson's Lawsuit Matters
Posted by Carter Wood
6-20-07 --
Judge Roy Pearson's lawsuit against his drycleaners for
losing his pants induces an equal amount of outrage and
mockery, but it's important to remember that this kind
of legal excess is not that unusual.
U.S. businesses and citizens are constantly
bedeviled by litigious cranks and cranky litigators.
Small business owners are especially vulnerable to
frivolous but destructive lawsuits. . . . Don Brunell,
president of the
Association of Washington Business,
Washington state's chamber of commerce, addresses that
sad fact and its consequences in
an excellent op-ed
in The Daily Columbian: . . . There is a mistaken
assumption that a small proprietor slapped with a
lawsuit simply lets his insurance company handle it.
Wrong. Many business owners shoulder the costs
themselves out of fear of higher premiums or the risk
that their insurance company will cancel their coverage.
Some start-up businesses simply cannot afford liability
insurance. In fact, the [Institute
for Legal Reform]
study shows that, in 2005, small business owners paid
$20 billion out of their own pockets for court costs and
out-of-court settlements. . . . Finally, the smallest
businesses, those with revenues of less than $1 million,
paid $31 billion in lawsuit-related costs. Let's put
that in perspective. These businesses, which represent
just 6 percent of total business revenues, paid more
than 20 percent of the national tort tab. These lawsuits
really do hit the "little guy" who struggles to make
ends meet.
The Great American Pants Suit
A judge pins a $67
million value on a pair of trousers--his own.
By Walter Olson, Wall
Street Journal
6-18-07 --
When attorney Roy Pearson filed suit demanding $67
million from the Chung family, whose Washington dry
cleaners had mishandled his pair of trousers, he must
have felt he was sitting pretty. Menacing a merchant
who's annoyed you with terrifyingly high legal
penalties--that's the way to show who wears the pants,
right? . . . Mr. Pearson probably had no idea that his
Great American Pants Suit--the trial of which just wound
up in a Washington courtroom last week, with a verdict
expected this week--would stir commentary around the
world and come to symbolize the extent to which lawsuits
in America can serve as a hobby for the spiteful and a
weapon for the rapacious.

It's nice to see that
even the organized plaintiffs bar piously deplores Mr.
Pearson's abuse of the law. It would be even nicer if
they agreed to stop opposing reforms that would give the
Chungs of the world a fighting chance the next time
around.
|
The next
generation RAZR package includes a voice
plan and feature of your choice at
lightening-fast 3G speed! The MOTORAZR V3xx
has a 1.3 MP camera, video playback and
music capabilities. Listen to your favorite
tunes on the MP3 music player and customize
your own playlists. Stay hands free with
stereo Bluetooth® wireless music profiles.
Snap crisp photos on your 8x zoom camera or
watch news, sports, and more with Cellular
Video capabilities. With 3G abilities you
can download music and videos at ultra fast
UMTS speeds. The ultra sleek design,
enhanced speech recognition, and multiple
messaging options will keep you connected in
style. The MOTORAZR V3xx is as hot as it is
cool!
 |
Pearson's Boss: Dude's Too Crazy to Be a Judge
DCist
If the results of
our poll yesterday
are any indication, ordinary people feel pretty strongly
that administrative law Judge Roy Pearson is a few
sandwiches short of a picnic, and really ought not to be
a judge anymore. Finally, the Examiner brings word that
Pearson's employer agrees with that sentiment.
Pants lawsuit could cost D.C. judge his $100,000 job
by Scott McCabe and Dan
Genz, The Examiner
|

(AP) Photo |
Administrative law judge
Roy Pearson leaves court after the second day of his
trial in Washington on Wednesday. Jin and Soo Chung are
being sued by Pearson for $54 million for what he calls
"misleading signage" at their dry-cleaning business. . .
. The boss of Roy L. Pearson Jr., the administrative law
judge whose $54 million pants lawsuit has turned the
D.C. legal system into a punch line on late-night talk
shows, has recommended that the city deny Pearson
another term on the bench, D.C. government sources said
Thursday. . . . In a letter to the three-person
commission that will decide whether Pearson gets
reappointed, District of Columbia Chief Administrative
Judge Tyrone T. Butler said Pearson does not deserve a
10-year term to the post, which pays more than $100,000
a year. . . . “My sense is that the commission will not
reappoint him,” a D.C. government source said. . . .
Butler’s letter reverses his previous recommendation in
support of Pearson that he sent to the commission before
the pants suit case gained worldwide notoriety.
Trial Began June 12, 2007
TRIAL ENDED JUNE 14th
Judge Judith Bartnoff said she would rule by the end of
next week after attorneys delivered their closing
arguments on Wednesday the 13th.
Wearing Down the Judicial System With a Pair of Pants
By Marc Fisher,
Washington Post
Don't look for Roy
Pearson to be out shopping for new suit pants this
weekend. At the end of the $54 million pants suit in
D.C. Superior Court yesterday, Judge Judith Bartnoff
said she wouldn't issue a decision until next week but
nonetheless gave a strong hint of her direction. . . .
After listening to Pearson argue for hour upon hour that
he was somehow protecting the interests of all
Washingtonians by using the D.C. consumer protection law
to punish Custom Cleaners for allegedly losing a pair of
his pants, Bartnoff said: "This is a very important
statute to protect consumers. It's also very important
that statutes like this are not misused." *****How
does such a case get to trial? How does one man get to
make a laughingstock of the system? Judges chipped away
at Pearson's case for two years, limiting the witnesses
he could call, trimming his claims. But Pearson
prevailed by burying the court in paperwork and bringing
up arguments just plausible enough to allow him a
hearing. Nobody wants to be on the wrong end of a
Pearson lawsuit; that fear lets him charge ahead.
Man suing over trousers aims to fund more cases
By Andy Sullivan
(Reuters) - The judge who
sued his dry cleaning shop for $54 million over a lost
pair of trousers said as the trial wrapped up on
Wednesday that he would use any winnings he might get to
encourage others to follow suit. . . . Roy L. Pearson,
an administrative judge for the District of Columbia,
said he only needed $2.5 million for himself to cover
the emotional distress he suffered after Custom Cleaners
misplaced a pair of pants he brought in for alteration.
. . . The remainder, he said, would be used "as an
incentive for other attorneys in private practice to
take on these kinds of cases."
DAY TWO -- 6/13/07
|