That Is Not Our Pants
Every so often a legal issue comes up that actually catches my interest. In a nutshell, a lawyer/judge named Roy Pearson wanted to get some pants altered, and then didn’t get them back on time. When the cleaners found the pants, Pearson believed that it was the wrong pair, and then sued the cleaners for $65 million (later reduced to $54 million) because their signs stated “Satisfaction Guaranteed” and “Same Day Service.” Pearson decided to decline settlement offers of up to $12,000 and represented himself. Check out some of these awesome court moments:
Pearson said he had no choice but to take on “the awesome responsibility” of suing the Chungs on behalf of every D.C. resident, reported the WaPo. Pearson kept referring to himself as “we.” Said Judge Judith Bartnoff: “Mr. Pearson, you are not a ‘we.’ You are an ‘I.’”
Kabitzin agrees with Judge Judy. Only We are allowed to use the royal We. In completely off-topic news, Bunky is considering buying a Wii so We + 1 can play.
“These are not my pants,” Pearson recalled telling Chung when she handed him a pair of gray pants with cuffs. “I have in my adult life, with one exception, never worn pants with cuffs.”
“And she said, ‘These are your pants.’ ”
Pearson paused. He struggled to breathe deeply. He could not continue. Pearson blurted a request for a break, stood up, turned around and walked out of the courtroom, tears dripping from his full and reddened eyes.
Damn, if someone accused Us of wearing pants with cuffs, We’d probably start tearing up, too.
Pearson said yesterday that “there is no case in the District of Columbia or in the United States that comes anywhere close to the outrageousness of the behavior of the defendants in this case.” When on cross-examination the lawyer for Custom Dry Cleaners asked Pearson, “Without regard to the law, as a human being, as a person, don’t you think it makes sense to interpret merchant signage in a reasonable way?,” Pearson responded, “No.”
Then, Judge Judith Bartnoff asked Pearson the following hypothetical, according to the WaPo: If a customer demands $1,000 for a lost garment and the merchant truly believes the customer is lying, does a “Satisfaction Guaranteed” sign require the shop owner to hand over a check? “Yes,” Pearson said.
Litigation lawyers get all the fun. And, since the judge ruled in favor of the cleaners and included court costs, the lawyers got great publicity and a big win (no doubt Pearson will appeal). However, considering that Pearson is in debt from his divorce and unemployed, it might be tough to collect that money.
Elsewhere Online | Kabitzin 6/25/2007
By Velius, 6/25/2007 @ 12:21 pm
When I heard about this lawsuit at the beginning, I thought it was the most ridiculous thing ever. Thank goodness for sanity.
By Chris, 6/25/2007 @ 12:38 pm
Anyone would cry for losing 54 million dollars. Though maybe he was reminded of “Luke, I am your father” and then going all emo “NOOOEESS THESE NOT MY PANTS!1″.