2 posts tagged “dc”

View other items tagged “dc:” Photos, Audio, Videos, Books or Links. View “dc” on Vox.

The justice system works: Roy Pearson loses

Jun 26, 2007
6 comments

[Cross-posted] Our long, international nightmare is (nearly) over. The US justice system works. Judge Judith Bartnoff found today that Roy L. Pearson is not entitled to any of the damages he sought against a hard-working Korean family operating Custom Cleaners, a small dry-cleaning outﬁt in Washington, DC.
Essentially, Judge Bartnoff, even applying a lower evidentiary standard, could not ﬁnd that Judge Pearson had discharged the burden of proof and that consumer law, as I noted, is to be interpreted in the eyes of the reasonable consumer.
She has not yet worked out the defendants’ claim about Pearson’s mala ﬁdes and vexatious litigation, but the Chungs were awarded judgement and costs.
The Washington Post has a copy of the PDF judgement here. I don’t think you need to be a lawyer or law student to read this judgement: it’s clear-cut and the case is, despite Judge Pearson’s claims, really simple. It also outlines all the facts, including what the media rightly had to miss in order to make the story easier to follow.
Consumer law classes will be interesting next semester.
But, more importantly, Judge Bartnoff has shown the world that the American stereotype of the litigious society does not really work in real life, something that Judge Pearson appears disconnected from. She may well have discouraged similar cases and has done the right thing not just as an ofﬁcer of the court, but as an American.

Judge Pearson reduces claim against Korean family—he “only” seeks $54 million

Jun 7, 2007
11 comments

Got this in the feedback form from my main site last night, from the law firm representing a Mom-and-Pop dry-cleaning outfit. If you recall, a Korean family was being sued for $65 million by an American judge because they lost his favourite pants. It looks like they are about to have their day in court, with an amended claim from the judge after outcries. Still, he wants $54 million—that’s some amendment.
I’ll post more if Manning & Sossamon inform me of developments. My best wishes go to Jin Nam Chung and Ki Chung. No prizes for guessing what I want to happen, especially to Judge Pearson. I think I share most people’s feelings, especially those Americans who feel Judge Pearson is giving their entire nation a bad name.

Update: $67 Million Dry Cleaning Case

On May 31, 2007, D.C. Administrative Law Judge, Roy L. Pearson, filed a Pre-Trial Brief in the Pearson v. Chung dry cleaner case. In the brief, Pearson shifts the focus of his claims from his allegedly lost pants to claims related to signage in the Chungs’ store. One sign reads “Satisfaction Guaranteed” and another reads “Same Day Service.” Pearson claims the signs are somehow misleading and apparently continues to seek over $54,000,000 in damages from the Chungs. Pearson had previously sought $67,000,000 in compensation from the Chungs.
Christopher Manning, of the law firm Manning & Sossamon in Washington D.C., represents the Chungs and made the following statement in response to Pearson's recent actions:

"Although it is always encouraging to see claims withdrawn, it is simply baffling that Mr. Pearson continues to assert that he is entitled to tens of millions of dollars as a result of two completely harmless, completely straight-forward signs. Mr. Pearson's claims are not founded in common sense and are extraordinarily abusive towards the Chungs. As a result, the Chungs' terrible ordeal continues. The Chungs' decision to move to and build a business in America began with the classic American dream. Mr. Pearson has turned that dream into an American nightmare."

Mr. Pearson's lawsuit has cost the Chungs tens of thousands of dollars in defense costs. Donations to a defense fund set up by the Chungs may be made at www.customcleanersdefensefund.com.
This case will be tried in courtroom 415 of the District of Columbia Superior Courthouse on June 11th and 12th beginning at 9:30am each day.
All questions regarding the matter should be directed to the office of Manning & Sossamon at:

Manning & Sossamon PLLC
1532 Sixteenth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036
(202) 387-2228 (voice)
(202) 387-2229 (fax)
chungdefense@manning-sossamon.com