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?