Add RSS RSS

Ambiguous Headline of the Day

We noted this development in passing yesterday. Now here’s an AP article with a great title:

Dry Cleaner in Pants Suit Closes Roy Pearson.jpg

And then she headed off to a clerkship interview?

P.S. Results of our recent fashion poll after the jump.

Dry Cleaner in Pants Suit Closes [AP]

reader poll results pants suit pantsuit skirt suit clerkship interview.jpg

Earlier: Clerkship Hiring: Today’s the Day

Comments

avatar
1 Posted by anonymous | Permalink Thursday, September 20, 2007 11:02 AM

i don't understand what the big deal is with pant suits/skirt suits. does anyone really care? are there actually guys out there who care if women wear skirt suits or pant suits? jeebus.

avatar
2 Posted by show it | Permalink Thursday, September 20, 2007 11:06 AM

all hot women should showcase their lovely asses in a tight pantsuit

avatar
3 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, September 20, 2007 11:09 AM

all hot guys should showcase their lovely asses in tight suit pants. and not wear jackets to cover them up.

avatar
4 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, September 20, 2007 11:12 AM

David,

This story has been covered elsewhere but your audience is much wider. You should do a lawyer/judge of the week peice on these incompetent, unethical, and unbelievably bumbling morons.

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/suffolk/ny-limurd155375663sep15,0,3058467.story

avatar
5 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, September 20, 2007 11:18 AM

See also:

http://blog.simplejustice.us/2007/09/14/appeals-court-buries-the-body-so-no-one-knows.aspx

avatar
6 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, September 20, 2007 11:19 AM

and finally:

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2007_09_16-2007_09_22.shtml#1190246916

avatar
7 Posted by I would but | Permalink Thursday, September 20, 2007 11:35 AM

I would wear it but my penis is too large- creates an unseemly bulge.

avatar
8 Posted by Its been asked but never answered | Permalink Thursday, September 20, 2007 11:41 AM

How did the defense incurr $100,00.00 in fees?????? that is equally outrageous... This case could have been won by just showing up and going through the motions. Preparation would consist of reading the file on the walk to the Courthouse. Unreal!!! How is this possible????

avatar
9 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, September 20, 2007 12:04 PM

Femmes with tree trunks and cankles should wear pants at all times. All others should wear skirts. Death to skorts and clam diggers.

avatar
10 Posted by The attorney sucked and is a crook | Permalink Thursday, September 20, 2007 12:25 PM

I tender an offer of judgment in the amount of $38.75 for the retard's pants. Case over. $100K what the fuck!

avatar
11 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, September 20, 2007 12:27 PM

I have cankles - it sucks. But I'm also 8 months preggers, so at least I have an excuse!

avatar
12 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, September 20, 2007 12:30 PM

12:27 - You are exempt from the dress ban, and may wear a pregnant femme sack.

avatar
13 Posted by What about the breasts? | Permalink Thursday, September 20, 2007 12:32 PM

I have cankles - it sucks. But I'm also 8 months preggers, so at least I have an excuse!

Are your beasts huge?

avatar
14 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, September 20, 2007 12:38 PM

Are you into dogs or something? Sick fuck.

avatar
15 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, September 20, 2007 1:25 PM

I would have taken the dry cleaner case pro bono, clients to pay costs only.

The cleaners should seriously consider an abuse of process suit against the (soon-to-be-former) ALJ.

avatar
16 Posted by Ha | Permalink Thursday, September 20, 2007 1:33 PM

Are you into dogs or something? Sick fuck.

HA I meant breasts!

Post Your Comment