Tort Reform

After we put up our post this morning about how Roy Pearson, of $54 million pants fame, might not get reappointed as an administrative law judge, a reader sent us this:

“Note this help wanted ad for a new DC ALJ (from the July 9 edition of the Legal Times).”

“I ask you: Coincidence, or just good planning?”

ALJ small Administrative Law Judge classified ad Legal Times Abovethelaw Above the Law blog.jpg
Hmm… A salary pushing the six-figures, and the ability to call yourself — or at least make restaurant reservations under — “judge”? That gig doesn’t sound half-bad…
Earlier: Roy Pearson: From Pseudo-Judge To Ex-Pseudo-Judge?

Roy Pearson Judge Roy L Pearson Abovethelaw Above the Law legal blog.jpgLast week we alluded to the possibility that Roy Pearson, plaintiff in the notorious $54 million pants case, might not be reappointed to his post as an administrative law judge. That possibility is now one step closer to being realized. From the Washington Post:

A city commission has voted to formally notify Administrative Law Judge Roy Pearson that he may not be reappointed to the bench, according to a government source.

In a letter sent to Pearson yesterday, the Commission on Selection and Tenure of Administrative Law Judges cited not only Pearson’s infamous failed lawsuit against Custom Cleaners, but his work as a judge the past two years.

So it’s not just about the pants. Pearson was also talking trash about his chief:

Concerns about Pearson’s temperament as an administrative law judge preceded the publicity about the lawsuit this spring….

In e-mails sent to his fellow judges and cited in the letter, Pearson’s contempt for Chief Administrative Law Judge Tyrone T. Butler was evident. In one of the missives, he spoke of protecting himself from any attempt by Butler “to knife” him. In another, he questioned Butler’s competence and integrity.

Talk of a knife fight? Is Roy Pearson a judge, or a summer associate?
David Nieporent, at Overlawyered, sums up the situation nicely: “Apparently trying to destroy a business by using the legal system to extort millions from the owners isn’t his big sin; his big sin is being rude to his boss.”
Litigious Judge’s Future Unclear [Washington Post]
Updates – August 8 [Overlawyered]
Earlier: Roy Pearson: No Justice, No Pants… No Job

Roy Pearson small Judge Roy L Pearson Abovethelaw Above the Law legal blog.JPGWhat do “Judge” Roy Pearson, of $54 million pants infamy, and ATL frequent commenter “Loyola 2L” have in common?
Both are — or should be — looking for new employment.
First, Pants Man Loses Case. Next, His Job [Raw Fisher / Washington Post]

pants 2 Roy Pearson Judge Roy L Pearson Abovethelaw Above the Law blog.JPGSee the Associated Press and the WSJ Law Blog. From the AP:

The $54 million pants, as they’ve come to be known, were the subject of a widely mocked lawsuit that garnered international attention. Now, they have their own security guard….

On display [at a fundraiser last night] were what the Chungs say are the pants that Roy Pearson brought in, were misplaced, and were later found. The guests had appetizers and cocktails, and under the stern gaze of the security guard, some posed for photos with the pants.

Quips reader Melissa Zawadzki: “Don’t ya just love happy endings?”
The Smithsonian famously dissed Monica Lewinsky’s blue dress. But how can they say no to a pair of $54 million pants?
$54M Pants Star in Fundraiser [Associated Press]
The Great American Pants Suit Fundraiser [WSJ Law Blog]

Roy Pearson Judge Roy L Pearson Abovethelaw Above the Law legal blog.jpgAdministrative Law Judge Roy Pearson is still pressing (harhar) his $54 million lawsuit over a pair of pants. From the Washington Post’s Marc Fisher:

Despite a clear finding by D.C. Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff that Pearson’s case against Custom Cleaners had no merit and that the cleaners’ possible misplacing of a pair of Pearson’s pants was not worth a penny to the plaintiff, Pearson is back.

He wrote to defense lawyer Christopher Manning this week to let the Chung family know that Pearson plans to file today a motion arguing that Bartnoff failed to address Pearson’s legal claims and asking the judge to reverse her verdict in the case.

If you can stomach it, read the rest after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Just When You Thought It Was Safe To Go Back to the Cleaners”

Following up on yesterday’s post about law firm advertising campaigns, here’s another interesting ad:
Mosh Pit Litigation Goldberg Weisman Cairo Abovethelaw Above the Law blog.jpg
Commentary after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “A Promising New Practice Area: Mosh Pit Litigation?”

If you’ve been feeling bad for Jin Nam and Soo Chung, the dry cleaners sued by crazy-ass pseudo-judge ALJ Roy Pearson for $54 million — over a pair of pants — now you can help:
Custom Cleaners Defense Fund Soo Chung Jin Nam Chung Chungs Abovethelaw Above the Law blog.JPG
As for what’s going on in the case, Marc Fisher has this update in today’s Washington Post. The trial is over; expect a ruling from Judge Judith Bartnoff sometime next week.
Wearing Down the Judicial System With a Pair of Pants [Washington Post]
Custom Cleaners Defense Fund [official website]

pants 2 Roy Pearson Judge Roy L Pearson Abovethelaw Above the Law blog.JPGOver at the Washington Post’s Offbeat blog, Emil Steiner is liveblogging Pearson v. Custom Cleaners — aka “The Case of the $54 Million Pants.” Check it out by clicking here (and scrolling down — no, farther down).
Here’s Steiner’s account of the plaintiff’s testimony:

If I had $54 million in my pocket, I’d almost give it to Roy Pearson to end this thing. Pearson took the stand this afternoon in his trial against Custom Cleaners, and it wasn’t exactly spellbinding.

Pearson went into seemingly every minute detail of life: his history of community service, his weight gain as a middle-aged man, his financial woes and his painful divorce. Even the opposing defense counsel was rubbing his eyes and suppressing yawns.

But the judge let Pearson tell his story, taking occasional notes, always with a somewhat bemused expression on her face. I could almost see the thought bubble over her head: Take as much time as you need to orchestrate your circus. (Though if circuses were this slow, Barnum & Bailey would be out of business.)

Then, just before 3:30, Roy L. Pearson broke down, appeared to almost cry, and quickly requested a break. Would it be heartless to ask whether he had been bored to tears?

Jeez. Should we lay off Judge Pearson? Until now, he struck us as a raging asshole rather unsympathetic plaintiff. But now it sounds like he may have… issues.
Does Roy Pearson need $54 million? Or does he just need a good therapist — and the right combination of prescription drugs?
Pearson v. Custom Cleaners: The Plaintiff Testifies (and Breaks Down!) [Offbeat]
Offbeat Blog [Washington Post]

pants Roy Pearson Judge Roy L Pearson Abovethelaw Above the Law blog.JPGRemember administrative law judge Roy L. Pearson? He filed a $67 million lawsuit against his dry cleaners. Over a pair of pants.
Well, the judge has decided to show some mercy upon the defendants. He has reduced his demand in the case:

A judge who was seeking $67 million from a dry cleaners that lost his pants has loosened the belt on his lawsuit. Now, he’s asking for only $54 million, according to a May 30 court filing in D.C. Superior Court….

He is now focusing his claims on signs in the shop that have since been removed. The suit alleges that Jin Nam Chung, Soo Chung and Ki Chung committed fraud and misled consumers with signs that claimed “Satisfaction Guaranteed” and “Same Day Service.”

So now he just wants a mere $54 million. What a great guy!
Judge Now Wants Just $54M From Cleaner [Associated Press via WTOP]
Earlier: ‘Judge’ of the Day: Roy Pearson, Jr.

Borat Above the Law Legal Blog Law Gossip Borat.JPGSeveral months ago, the world was awash in Borat litigation. But then things died down on that front.
Now they’re heating up again. From a tipster:

Check out this lawsuit. Although the damages claim might be a little silly, it seems like this guy might have a valid claim — he didn’t sign a waiver like those frat boys.

I’m a corporate lawyer, so I have no idea. I’d love to see what some litigator types think about it.

An excerpt from the complaint appears at Gothamist; the entire document is posted over at The Smoking Gun.
Your thoughts are welcome, in the comments.
NYC Borat Victim: Movie “Very Nice…Not!” [Gothamist]
“Borat” Sued Yet Again [The Smoking Gun]
Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of Borat lawsuits (scroll down)

Page 4 of 6123456