Judge Sues Dry Cleaners for $65 Mil.
 

Story on AOL News

Come on - $15,000 for a car rental every week for 10 years to drive to a different dry cleaners??? As the article says, there's no constitutional right to have a dry cleaners anywhere near you.

I hope this judge is disbarred. He is obviously ridiculous.

wow, that is.... ridiculous.
i hope they disbar him, if he makes these kinds of stupid allegations in his personal life, imagine what kind of decisions he makes on the bench.... wow....

What a jerk.

Has it gone to court yet? I hope the judge laughs in his face!

yeah. he just seems like a general ass. i mean these people are probably not that well of, and he's just a spoiled fool who thinks he can sue them for fraud because of two signs posted in their shop? come on...

They offered him $12,000 and he wouldn't take it? Pure balls.

i heard about this a few weeks ago. he's lucky he was offered $12,000. 65 mil is an ASTRONOMICAL amount for anything. i hope people refuse to sell him pants after this.

I don't. I mean, do you really want someone with balls this big walking around pantless??:o

Rule 11 is wonderful.

Oh, come on, y'all! He said they were his favorite pants.

Quit being such a civ pro tool.

I read about this earlier today on Yahoo! news... This is beyond ridiculous and frivalous. This judge should disbarred AND fined like Anna Nicole's mother for wasting the courts time. Shame on him!!

At this time in my life and only at this time in my life, I'll take that as a compliment.

Oh you're in law school?

I hope so.. otherwise I'm doing a lot of reading and highlighting for no good reason.

Seriously, about the guy with the pants... There's apparently a D.C. law, applicable only to the D.C. Circuit where a consumer fraud statute carries a penalty of $1,200 per day. The fraud alleged is that the cleaners had a sign saying "same day service" and "satisfaction 100% guaranteed." Neither of these were honored.

The lawsuit is 'creative' to say the least.

Rule 11 comes in where the court needs to make an example out of the party being sanctioned. Here, the Plaintiff has spurned what most would say are several generous settlement offers because I guess he's really convinced he's entitled to that 65 million dollar award.

Our best bet for sanctions, I think is in this guy's apparently overbroad discovery requests and his request for damages for the rental car. The defendant's lawyers are also, I think acting a little bit unethically by contacting the media regarding pending litigation and making prejudicial comments about past settlement offers, the "found" pants, etc. That's a bit shady to me.

The part that is so hard to believe is that he really could believe he is entitled to 65 million or that he really expects to get it.

What do you suppose he is really thinking? That he wants the business to go under so a new dry cleaner will open there?

Man Must be a Lawyer ergo a Judge.

Must be a friggen Moroon!:mad:

=This Week's Irony Overload

I hope you spill food on yourself soon.

And how in the hell will he get 65 million out of a family owned dry cleaner? Does he think that all the dry cleaners pool their money or something? Because I think 12K was WAY too much for his whiny ass, but that's realistic to what they could have afforded.

Garnish their lottery winnings.

That judge is so stupid. Didn't the article say that he had those same pair of pants back?!? Dry cleaners make mistakes all the time, and he just needs to suck it up and move on with life. I seriously hope and pray that he is disbarred (or whatever the term is).

Both of my brothers-in-law are well known and highly respected attorneys in Ohio.

They are exceptionally good men, I think, and I respect them and thier profession for the most part.

This kind of thing gives the legal profession a black eye, though.

I can only shake my head in disbelief.

26 Miles Across The Sea?
 

It's his lucky pants!!! He never takes them off while flying high above the skyscrappers!

It reminds me of the Catalina Island song...

26 miles across the sea
Santa Catalina is the place for me
Santa Catalina is the island of...
Romance...
Romance...
No pants!!!

he dropped his suit from 65 mil to 54 mil and still included is lawyer's fees...altho he is representing himself

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,282112,00.html

Am I the only one who doesn't hope that the dry cleaners involved file a countersuit for defamation and sue the pants off of this judge?

ooooooooooooooh I see what you did there

LOL...good call, I didn't even notice that.:)

I'm up here in the District and word is the cleaners are going under trying to pay for this case. So now there's a website up where people can help them out and donate money http://www.customcleanersdefensefund.com/

Their case info site says that the trial is over and they're expecting a verdit next week.

ETA: It also said that their final settlement offer was $12,000 and if he doesn't win more than that, he will have to pay their legal fees.

I doubt any judge in their right mind would reward more than $12,000 for a pair of pants. Especially when he's representing himself.

they seem like such a sweet couple...my mom heard they were going back home after this...what a shame.

I think that whatever this lawyer wins might just be taken away from him by a subsequent Rule 11 (sanctions) motion.

I've seen the statute in question. I think the pants owner has a basic case according to the law. It's just that one of the rules of statutory interpretation is that the law should not be interpreted so as to achieve an absurdity. If that is true, I've never seen a more accurate place for that to be true.

The fair thing to do here would be for the judge to award the plaintiff whatever it costs to buy a new pair of pants which were like the ones he had before (the law doesn't care if they're lucky). Then, I think the judge ought to award the dry cleaners their attorney's fees -- payable by the plaintiff since the plaintiff has unreasonably spurned a number of settlement offers.

I don't know if that can be done, but that's what I'd like to see.

I wish he would have sued them for something real like how dry-cleaning my suit made of Italian Wool costs more than dry-cleaning my boyfriend's suit made of Italian Wool when his has more damn fabric than mine. That's a serious issue facing the legal profession.

Yeah......I often would like to sue my dry cleaners when they break my buttons on shirts that have to be pressed.

Sounds like another unfair bar to women in the legal profession... low pay and exorbitant dry cleaning costs.

Damn straight. I have him lie and say my shirts are his when he takes them in so I get the cheap price but you can't really do that with a skirtsuit. :(

Plain and simple, this Clown as a Judge is an idiot and I hope He gets disbarred!:mad:

And some want to agree with him? Where is the justice?:rolleyes:

The judge lost.
http://www.charlotte.com/118/story/173149.html

GOOD!!

I hope he's disbarred and the drycleaners sue the crap out of him.

AND keep his lucky pants, that I'm sure are still hanging in the shop.

Was there a motion for sanctions filed? I wonder if it was ruled on.

Edit: Here is the judgment

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_b...n_judgment.pdf

Supposedly a decision on the rule 11 motion is pending.

I hope they sue and take his pants and butt to the cleaners and he gets gone from The Law!:mad: