The trial has officially begun. The tragedy is that this has even gone to trial.
No doubt by now you have caught the stench of more litigious abuses referred to as Roy Pearson v Custom Cleaners.
This $67 million lawsuit is quintessential crap. However, it has now dropped to
about $54 million. Still crap.
On the surface, the frivolity about missing pants is obvious and the humour over the top, but in reality, at least for proprietors the Chungs, it's not funny...at all.
Facts:
The 1st pair of pants traveled to territories unknown 5 years ago. The Chung family paid $150 to compensate for Pearson's loss, which was in good form, and he was so satisfied that he maintained their thriving business relationship.
However, things had apparently gotten so bad between his expanding waistline and the 2nd pair of trousers that, at the first sign of freedom, those pant legs kicked up in high gear and made a run for the border; perhaps waiting long enough until the 1st pair gathered enough money to send for them. That was 2 years ago. (They were subsequently found on the lam, but Pearson is presently denying pant-ernity)
Pearson wanted $1,150, so why did he turn down the $3,000 compensation? He's holding out for $67 mil, half mil of which is charted as "emotional" damages and over half mil in legal fees - HE'S HIS OWN LAWYER! Oy!
The crap quotient is so high here that I don't know where to begin...
The real issue us an abuse of power by a temperamental admin judge who has created a mockery of the civil justice system all in the name of civil liberties.
Let me see if I get this right: you ask for x, offered x times 2, which you refuse, because your satisfaction wasn't guaranteed?
Think about that for a moment; can anyone really - philosophically speaking - guarantee your satisfaction? High maintenance metro-sexuals can never be satisfied because of there false and grossly out of control sense of entitlement. Its colloquialism, a thing we say to lighten the interaction between people we know we can't stand servicing anyway.
How appalling!
I think I'll send Judge Pearson a very peaceful communication to take his pants and leave the Chungs alone.
No doubt by now you have caught the stench of more litigious abuses referred to as Roy Pearson v Custom Cleaners.
This $67 million lawsuit is quintessential crap. However, it has now dropped to
On the surface, the frivolity about missing pants is obvious and the humour over the top, but in reality, at least for proprietors the Chungs, it's not funny...at all.
Facts:
The 1st pair of pants traveled to territories unknown 5 years ago. The Chung family paid $150 to compensate for Pearson's loss, which was in good form, and he was so satisfied that he maintained their thriving business relationship.
However, things had apparently gotten so bad between his expanding waistline and the 2nd pair of trousers that, at the first sign of freedom, those pant legs kicked up in high gear and made a run for the border; perhaps waiting long enough until the 1st pair gathered enough money to send for them. That was 2 years ago. (They were subsequently found on the lam, but Pearson is presently denying pant-ernity)
Pearson wanted $1,150, so why did he turn down the $3,000 compensation? He's holding out for $67 mil, half mil of which is charted as "emotional" damages and over half mil in legal fees - HE'S HIS OWN LAWYER! Oy!
The crap quotient is so high here that I don't know where to begin...
The real issue us an abuse of power by a temperamental admin judge who has created a mockery of the civil justice system all in the name of civil liberties.
Let me see if I get this right: you ask for x, offered x times 2, which you refuse, because your satisfaction wasn't guaranteed?
Think about that for a moment; can anyone really - philosophically speaking - guarantee your satisfaction? High maintenance metro-sexuals can never be satisfied because of there false and grossly out of control sense of entitlement. Its colloquialism, a thing we say to lighten the interaction between people we know we can't stand servicing anyway.
How appalling!
I think I'll send Judge Pearson a very peaceful communication to take his pants and leave the Chungs alone.
For the first time in a long time I actually found myself glued to the tv recently for the ending of the Judge Pearson vs. The Korean Dry Cleaners. It was like OJ suspense, it was killing me.
By Lisa Stevens | Published 6/22/2007 | Read more »
Roy Pearson is filing a lawsuit against South Korean dry-cleaner owners Jin Nam Chung, Soo Chung, and Ki Chung. The judge is representing himself and he wants an astounding $65 million for a pair of pants that were at one time missing.
By The Douginator | Published 5/5/2007 | Read more »
Roy Pearson, a DC administrative hearings judge has filed a lawsuit in the amount of $65 million against Custom Cleaners in Northeast Washington over a pair of pants.
By Angela Russell | Published 5/3/2007 | Read more »
According to the Associated Press, the dry cleaners sued for $54 million over a pair of missing pants have won the case.
By Rachel Krech | Published 6/25/2007 | Read more »
When forming a lawsuit, one must determine what the lawsuit is all about. This, in fact, is what makes lawsuits so interesting. One person's point-of-view versus another person's point-of-view combined with the rational of a judge (and possibly a jury).
By B. Hurt | Published 9/5/2007 | Read more »
A review of the new hygiene challenged, tweener girlpower flick The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants
By The Jay | Published 6/15/2005 | Read more »
|
|
Most Comments Today
- Death at Disney World in Orlando, Florida Monorails collide one driver has died at the Disney World Theme Park in Orlan... 29 Comments
- A Little Good News Today Here is...a little good news today. 25 Comments
- Why Would a Web Writer Drop DayLife.Com? Before I share my story with you, dear readers, I want to point out that Dayl... 24 Comments
- Give a Damn Another new song, this one describes the feelings of us who save the world ev... 17 Comments
- Hair and Make-Up Tips from Nancy Looking good is as easy. Looking stunningly beautiful is an art. 16 Comments
- Bachelorette 5 Spoiler: Wes Hayden Spills the Beans About... This week July 6, 2009 episode 8 of the Bachelorette Jillian will finally d... 16 Comments