Judge Sues Dry Cleaners for $65 Mil.

[Kevin]

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.