$67 Million lawsuit over missing pants

[fabsroman]

Can you believe that an attorney sued a dry cleaner for $67 Million because they lost a pair of his pants. He turned down an offer of $3,000, $4,000 and finally $12,000 to settle the case, and he sued them for $67 Million. His justification is that they had promised "satisfaction guaranteed" and he wasn't satisfied.

What kills me is that he is a DC attorney that is representing himself and the case is filed in a Court that just called me today to reschedule a meeting. This guy should be disbarred.

By the way, I got to see the pair of pants and there was nothing special about them except that they were his "favorite" pants.

This guy has obviously lost his mind. Then again, it is a black attorney suing an asian dry cleaner.

[Rocky Raab]

Worse, Fabs. I heard on a talk show that he's a brand-new JUDGE.

Allegedly, he's been in a long feud with them over a variety of issues. They long ago told him to stop bringing his business to them - but he doesn't own a car and claims they are the only dry cleaners in walking distance, so he HAS TO use them.

Cripes, on his salary, he could UPS his clothes back and forth to China if he chose to!

If this is an example of his "judge-ment" I think his qualifications to be a judge are pretty slim.

[fabsroman]

So, you mean to tell me that I could possibly be in front of this moron arguing my case. I have run into some pretty terrible Judges, but I think this one would take the cake. The dry cleaner should have refused to do business with him and told him to take his stuff elsewhere.

What I don't understand is how his damages could be anything more than the cost of used pants. Just because I have a sentimental value for my 1989 Mustang and I wouldn't sell it for $100,000, doesn't mean that I will get $100,000 from somebody should they run into me.

Honestly, if this guy is a judge there is something seriously wrong with society.

[fabsroman]

Yep, he is a judge. Here is a link.

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=3119381&page=1

For the amount he is suing over, he could have a brand new pair of pants almost three to four times a day for the rest of his life. This guy should be disbarred and thrown off the bench. This stuff is what really gets me fired up.

[M.T. Pockets]

What scared me the most about this story is that this guy is actually a judge.

How hard is it to remove him from the bench ? It's pretty obvious he's not competent and he's abusing the entire legal system.

[Gunslingergirl]

From what I've read, it sounds like he has a vendetta against the dry cleaners, and is trying to cause them pain and suffering. I guess things had dragged on for a couple of years before they got to this point.

I hope whatever judge hears this case has the sense to dismiss it as a bad lawsuit.

GSG

[fabsroman]

It appears that he is an administrative law judge, which is usually the Judge with the least power in the legal system. Based upon what I have read, it doesn't appear that the DC Superior Court Judges are all too thrilled with his lawsuit either and some have mentioned that he has done some things in bad faith. Honestly, I think there should be something in the law that if you do not accept a monetary offer made by the opposing party and you get 75% or less of that amount through trial, you should be responsible for a portion of the opposing party's legal fees. This guy turned down a $12,000 offer on a pair of pants that might have been worth $150. I think $12,000 would have been plenty for his inconvenience and then some.

[Dom]

Utterly unimaginable from a common person with common sense. I just don't know enough about the legal system to understand how this is even possible, and I probably never will. 67m? Rrrriiiiigggghhhht. I know what would put a stop to this is one simple little law that said you sue for whatever amount you want, but if you LOSE, you pay what you were suing for. Same for illegal immigrants, one simple law that said all illegal immigrants are treated EXACTLY as the country you came from treats illegal immigrants.

I dunno, must be a LOT more behind it than meets the eye or makes the press, Waidmannsheil, Dom.

[Rocky Raab]

Dom, I've been thumping for those same two laws myself for what seems forever.
(You can sue for whatever, but if you lose, you pay the same, and "be treated like your country treats others".)

Except that I wanted the second one to include not only immigrant treatment, but military prisoner treatment, too. Today, I'd have to add "religious tolerance" to the list of Golden Rule applications.

[fabsroman]

You cannot hold somebody responsible for paying the opposing party if they lose a lawsuit, or they don't get what they ask for. Nobody would bring a lawsuit even if they have valid claim because they would be scared to death if they lost. How would a small individual ever sue a large corporation. What about a design defect lawsuit where the plaintiff is asking for a million dollars because he lost an arm or a leg? What would happen if he lost that lawsuit? He would be financially ruined. Essentially, there needs to be some common sense approach to this. The way the system works right now is that frivolous lawsuits should be thrown out by a judge on a Motion to Dismiss by the Defendant and the plaintiff pays the defendant's attorneys fees upon the discretion of the Judge.

The issue with this pants matter is that the Judge actually has a small claims case for the cost of the pants of $150. However, he is making a big deal out of this because the sign in the window read "Satisfaction Guaranteed." Please, these people tried to satisfy him, and even offered him $12,000 for his pants, which would satisfy any reasonable person, but not this lunatic. The sad thing is that a Judge on this case needs to allow the case to go to a jury if there is any merit whatsoever to the claim, and then it needs to be determined by a Jury. That is the problem. Everybody is entitled to their day in Court as long as there is some merit to their claim. However, this guy is being very vindictive about the entire thing, and over a pair of pants no less. That is what has me bent out of shape. This is over a pair of pants. Do we have nothing better to do than argue over a pair of pants when a person is offered $12,000 for them? I sent an e-mail to one of my black attorney friends that practices in DC and he couldn't believe it either. He also thinks the guy should be disbarred.

[jplonghunter]

fabsroman
Seems to me for that kind of money the suit should have had (2) pair of pants.

jplonghunter

[multibeard]

Let me on the jury.

I would award him a chit to the Salvation Army Resale shop for one pair of used pants plus paying the cleaners legal fees.

[bigkevmorgan]

only in america folks

[TreeDoc]

If the Judge was missing his matching suit pants.....wouldn't he only have half a law suit?

[fabsroman]

TD,

You have one heck of a great sense of humor. If the tree business goes south, you should think about getting into the comdey business.