Judge Who Lost $54M Suit Not Giving Up Pants Fight

Lubna Takruri

The Associated Press

July 09, 2007

An administrative law judge who lost a $54 million lawsuit against a dry cleaner over a missing pair of pants is not giving up his fight against the South Korean immigrant owners of the business.

Roy L. Pearson notified their defense attorney of his plans to file a motion this week asking that District of Columbia Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff reverse or clarify her verdict. Bartnoff ruled last month that Pearson should be awarded nothing.

Pearson is arguing that Bartnoff failed to address his legal claims when she ruled that the owners of Custom Cleaners did not violate the city's consumer protection law by failing to live up to Pearson's expectations of a "Satisfaction Guaranteed" sign once displayed in the store.

The shop owners' defense attorney, Chris Manning, said the lawsuit already has created enough distress for his clients, Soo Chung, Jin Nam Chung and Ki Y. Chung. He is pleading with Pearson to drop the case and move on.

"He does not appear to be giving up anytime soon," Manning said. "This is very unfortunate for the Chungs, the D.C. taxpayers and for Mr. Pearson himself."

Pearson did not immediately return an e-mail request for comment.

Meanwhile, Manning has filed a motion in D.C. Superior Court asking the court to require Pearson to pay for the Chungs' tens of thousands of dollars in attorney fees.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Tort Reform Association are sponsoring a July 24 fundraiser for the family.

The case, which drew international attention, began in 2005 when Pearson became a judge and brought several suits for alterations to Custom Cleaners. A pair of pants from one suit was missing when he requested it two days later. A week later, the Chungs said the pants had been found, but Pearson denied that they were his and decided to sue.

Pearson's suit, which originally asked for $67 million, was based on a strict interpretation of the city's consumer protection law -- which imposes fines of $1,500 per violation. It also included damages for inconvenience, mental anguish and attorney fees for representing himself.