The US$54 Million Pants

In this case, the main problem was that Mr. Pearson knew the nuances of the Washington, DC judicial system, and he used that to his advantage. The previous judge on the case tried to dismiss the claims, but found that some of them could not be dropped (the judge did prevent Mr. Pearson from turning it into a class-action lawsuit). Mr. Pearson was representing himself, so he had no attorney fees to pay. The trial judge in this case gave Mr. Pearson plenty of rope to hang himself during the trial, and he did just that. My favorite part was when he broke down in tears on the stand.

From what I've read about the case since it ended, things are going to backfire on Mr. Pearson in a major way. In addition to losing his claim and having to pay court costs for the Chungs, the judge is considering making him pay their attorney fees as well. Also, Mr. Pearson is an appointed judge with a limited term. The DC city council and the mayor are working to remove him from office based on his conduct (and he'll probably sue the city).

Jam it back in, in the dark.

It looks like the nut will finally lose his job.

Originally Posted by Washington Post

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 of putting him out of a job.

Quote:

The commission is expected to address the Chung case specifically in its letter to Pearson, pointing out that his no-holds-barred pursuit of mega-millions in a case stemming from a $10.50 alteration on a pair of suit pants raises serious questions about his judicial temperment and raises public questions about judicial ethics and standards. Following receipt of the letter, Pearson would then have the right to a hearing before the commission. Only after that hearing would the commission formally move to end Pearson's tenure as a judge. Pearson has not been sitting as a judge since the end of April, when his first term on the bench expired. Rather, he is now technically considered an "attorney advisor" to the Office of Administrative Hearings. Asked what Pearson does in that position, a high-ranking city official said, "Zippo."

My favorite part:

Quote:

After [Tyrone] Butler [Chief Administrative Law Judge] came back with a pro-Pearson letter, Pearson sent a series of emails within the ALJ staff disparaging the chief judge, calling him "evil" and mean-spirited. That helped sway Butler to switch yet again, to a recommendation against reappointment.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

The article does say that the Chungs have gotten around $50,000 in donations to their legal funds, which just about covers their court costs for the initial round of the case. Unfortunately, that does nothing for the appeal that Pearson plans to file (now that he's going to have lots of free time).

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.